The online community for software testing & quality assurance professionals
 
 
Calendar   Today's Topics
Sponsors:




Lost Password?

Home
BetaSoft
Blogs
Jobs
Training
News
Links
Downloads



Quality Engineering >> Defect Tracking

Pages: 1
muleheadjoe
Newbie


Reged: 09/10/12
Posts: 2
defect metric conceptual problem
      #716202 - 09/10/12 10:05 AM

I'm working in a shop where we need to consolidate our test reporting & metrics (reporting chaos: different PMs on different projects using different methodologies). I'm not a PM or dev, my role is metrics & reporting.

One of the suggested metrics is "% of Unit defects found in QA testing" and this is how it was described: "The unit defects are the ones which should have been reported by DEV and should have gotten fixed before release to QA. This metric gives a picture about the unit test process followed in the project."

That seems to imply that all defects found/reported during Subsystem/SIT/UAT are "Unit Defects" for reporting purposes. That doesn't sound right to me. How do we determine that any particular bug 'should have been found/fixed by DEV before QA'? That concept kinda obviates the need for QA ... I mean, QA exists *because* not all bugs are found / fixed in dev, right?

I don't know who authored that metric, it came out of an info-dump given to me to work through. I'm not sure I see the utility / benefit to using that particular metric, but wanted to hear opinions from a knowledgeable audience before making a decision.

Thanks :-)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Joe Strazzere
Moderator


Reged: 05/15/00
Posts: 12344
Loc: Massachusetts, USA
Re: defect metric conceptual problem [Re: muleheadjoe]
      #716204 - 09/10/12 10:30 AM

Perhaps the intent is to dig into defects found in Subsystem/SIT/UAT and assign a root cause? Those that might have a root cause other than "not detected by Unit Testing" could be:
- Defect in the Requirements?
- Defect in the Specs?
- Performance defects?
- Platform side-effects?
- Anything else that isn't traditionally intended to be handled at the Unit Testing level within your shop?

And if that's the case, then I guess the utility/benefit to this metric is to isolate those defects which *could* have been detected at the Unit Test level from all the rest, and to allow someone to determine if the number is "too high". Then remedial/corrective action could be taken. This is similar to all other metrics, right?

BTW, I've never met anyone whose defined role was "metrics & reporting". Interesting! Perhaps you could share the metrics you collect with us, and tell us how this new metric is different from your point of view? I don't see much difference here.

--------------------
- Joe
Visit AllThingsQuality.com to learn more about quality, testing, and QA!

I speak only for me. I do not speak for my employer, nor for anyone else.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
muleheadjoe
Newbie


Reged: 09/10/12
Posts: 2
Re: defect metric conceptual problem [Re: Joe Strazzere]
      #716212 - 09/10/12 12:25 PM

I'm a general purpose IT consultant ... I do whatever the client wants me to do ... in this case, they said "fix our metrics & reporting" :-)

I'm gathering all kinds of metrics-related information from various sources and plugging it all into a logical framework. This project ain't complete yet, but the goal is to have a "playbook" which spells out all the testing related activities, roles, and metrics (including collection & reporting methods -- i.e., not just the "what" but also the "how"). Every project would then be able to access this playbook and just follow the steps to be compliant with the overlord's requirements.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Joe Strazzere
Moderator


Reged: 05/15/00
Posts: 12344
Loc: Massachusetts, USA
Re: defect metric conceptual problem [Re: muleheadjoe]
      #716216 - 09/10/12 12:47 PM

Got it, thanks. Interesting.

Again, I don't really see how the "% of Unit defects found in QA testing" is fundamentally different from any other metric. Perhaps it depends on how your client defines Unit Test responsibilities and processes.

--------------------
- Joe
Visit AllThingsQuality.com to learn more about quality, testing, and QA!

I speak only for me. I do not speak for my employer, nor for anyone else.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1



Extra information
0 registered and 8 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  AJ, Daniel_S, swt88 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 2916

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us | Privacy statement SQAForums

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5