16 July 2024 Leave a comment QA
Understanding the performance of a QA team can be complex, and organizations often look for metrics to measure effectiveness. One such metric is the percentage of escaped defects, which represents how many defects are found by customers after a release. This article delves into the viability of using % escaped defects as a key performance indicator (KPI) and offers insights on its strengths and limitations.
Why % Escaped Defects Might Not Be Ideal
Using % escaped defects as a KPI might seem straightforward, but it has several inherent flaws:
- Equal Weightage of Bugs: Not all bugs have the same impact. Critical bugs that affect core functionalities are far more serious than minor cosmetic issues. A simple percentage does not account for this variation in severity.
- Focus on Quantity Over Quality: This metric can encourage testers to find more minor bugs rather than focusing on critical issues, skewing the perceived performance.
- Influence of Development Quality: The quality of code developed plays a significant role. A team working with high-quality code may naturally have fewer escaped defects than a team dealing with more buggy code, irrespective of the tester’s performance.
- Customer-Facing Bias: Testers might prioritize UI and user experience testing over non-customer-facing aspects, leading to an unbalanced testing approach.
- Contextual Variability: Factors like time constraints, project complexity, and team dynamics can significantly influence the number of escaped defects, making it an unreliable standalone metric.
Alternative Approaches to Measure QA Performance
Given the limitations of % escaped defects, it’s crucial to adopt a more holistic approach to measure QA performance. Here are some recommended strategies:
1. Criticality of Bugs Identified
Assess the criticality of the bugs found by testers. A decrease in critical bugs and an increase in customer satisfaction can be good indicators of effective testing.
2. Contextual Quality Assessment
Evaluate the software quality before and after a tester joins a project. Look for improvements in areas such as reduced critical bugs and enhanced test automation coverage.
3. Feedback and Collaboration
Gather feedback from developers and other stakeholders about the tester’s contributions. Positive feedback can indicate effective collaboration and problem-solving skills.
4. Process Adherence and Documentation
Ensure that testers follow established processes and maintain thorough documentation. This can help in identifying areas of improvement and maintaining consistency.
Balancing Metrics for a Comprehensive View
While no single metric can encapsulate a tester’s performance, combining multiple indicators can provide a more comprehensive view:
- Time taken to resolve bugs
- Accuracy and clarity of bug reports
- Effectiveness of test automation
- Customer feedback and satisfaction
How Repeato Can Enhance Your QA Process
For organizations looking to streamline their QA process, Repeato offers a robust solution. As a no-code test automation tool for iOS and Android, Repeato leverages computer vision and AI to create, run, and maintain automated tests efficiently. This ensures that critical bugs are caught early, enhancing overall software quality.
Repeato’s simplicity and ease of setup make it an excellent choice for teams aiming to improve their testing processes without extensive coding knowledge. By incorporating Repeato into your QA strategy, you can achieve faster test execution and more reliable results, ultimately leading to higher customer satisfaction.
For more information on how to leverage Repeato for your testing needs, check out our Getting Started Guide.
