honey0401
Newbie
Reged: 07/23/10
Posts: 3
|
|
Hello Folks,
We are starting on a refactoring of a 20 year old application. The collaboration model is quite complex as we are outsourcing the analysis, build and test effort to 3 vendors. Analysis of the existing system is provided by vendor A, build by vendor B and test by vendor C. I am a believer of checklists as I know it did worked for me when I was still in the software factory. Now that I work for the client, I am overly concerned about the quality of work that these vendors will deliver, I need to protect the client. I still believe that entry/exit criteria and sign off still works in this scenario but to what extent, that I have doubts. Say vendor B delivers the unit tested component, vendor C signs off and starts testing. During testing, defect was found. Now what? We get vendor B to fix their mess? Vendor B will now start pointing fingers at vendor C stating that they signed off the product. How best do we avoid this scenario?
Your advise please.
Thank you very much
|
Joe Strazzere
Moderator
Reged: 05/15/00
Posts: 10104
Loc: Massachusetts, USA
|
|
Quote:
Your advise please.
Read the contract you signed with the vendors.
In there somewhere, you'll see hints about the minimum that they are contracted to do.
Expect that the minimum will occur.
--------------------
- Joe
I speak only for me. I do not speak for my employer, or for anyone else.
Visit my new blog All Things Quality
|
honey0401
Newbie
Reged: 07/23/10
Posts: 3
|
|
The contracts with these vendors are not yet final, hence, we can still amend the statement of work. With that said, how do we avoid finger pointing from happening? Finger pointing certainly hurts both parties and most of all the client as the issue cannot be resolve until the other party gives in. This is a risk to bith schedule and quality
|
Joe Strazzere
Moderator
Reged: 05/15/00
Posts: 10104
Loc: Massachusetts, USA
|
|
Quote:
how do we avoid finger pointing from happening?
You probably don't. Outsourcing the work across multiple vendors invites finger pointing.
Insert very strict penalties in the contracts, and hope for the best.
--------------------
- Joe
I speak only for me. I do not speak for my employer, or for anyone else.
Visit my new blog All Things Quality
|
TestingMentor
Member
Reged: 12/28/06
Posts: 201
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
Refactoring a 20 year old product? Really? It seems this will invite unnecessary complexity. Depending on the size of the product you might just be better off rebuilding to prevent a lot of headaches.
But, that aside, I don't quite understand you business model in which you are going to have vendor C sign off on vendor B's work.
It sounds as if your development lifecycle is very "waterfall-ish" or serial.
As Joe suggests, your statement of work with each vendor should be clear and specify exit criteria for vendor B to satisfy their contractual obligations.
--------------------
- Bj -
I.M. Testy blog
Testing Mentor
|
honey0401
Newbie
Reged: 07/23/10
Posts: 3
|
|
Not really waterfall-ish. We call it incremental because we deliver in small chunks rather than a big bang approach
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
