Timeline for Should a Product Owner be asking developers to do QA to meet deadlines?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 12, 2014 at 12:28 | comment | added | David Espina | If you think a method like agile or scrum somehow managed to remove human biases that have evolved over thousands of years, then we have nothing more to discuss. I could care less what agile or scrum thinks it does successfully. Human factors have interfered with our methods for hundreds of years and will do so long after agile has been forgotten. | |
| Sep 12, 2014 at 12:23 | comment | added | Venture2099 | I would suggest you read about Agile and Scrum before trying to answer a question about it starting with the line..."I don't know the specifics of Agile." If you don't know, you should make a comment rather than an answer. | |
| Sep 12, 2014 at 0:08 | comment | added | David Espina | It is NOT about people trying to sneak garbage through. It is not malicious; it is not lying. I think, generally, people want to do good work. It is about biases and incentives that exacerbate those biases. Look, believe whatever you want, but do yourself a favor a read up a bit about human factors how they affect what we see, interpret, and perceive. | |
| Sep 11, 2014 at 17:53 | comment | added | Venture2099 | @DavidEspina - without being too blunt about it. If a Dev marks their own homework in such a way as to hide, obscure or deny good testing then they get fired fairly rapidly when the stakeholders are invited into Sprint Reviews to see a functioning product. The iterative nature keeps everyone honest since they have to demo every week, fortnight or 30 days. You built it, you own it (until the PO takes ownership). | |
| Sep 10, 2014 at 16:45 | comment | added | Todd A. Jacobs♦ | There are differences between unit testing, acceptance testing, and approvals/sign-off. While agile processes typically include TDD/ATDD within each iteration, customer acceptance is also baked in as part of the Sprint Review, so this isn't as much of an issue as one might think. | |
| Sep 10, 2014 at 12:11 | comment | added | Péter Török | If developers are doing this, the result will blow up at the next sprint review when they are expected to demonstrate to the Product Owner and possibly other stakeholders as well what they have completed during the sprint. Sprint reviews are due every 4 weeks at most, so feedback is rapid enough. This is btw a key point in agile. In traditional QC processes, feedback is slow, which is very costly in the long run. | |
| Sep 10, 2014 at 12:05 | comment | added | David Espina | You check my work and give me a passing grade, and I'll do the same for you. It is about incentives and work motivation. The QC folks should be completely independent with different rewards and incentive packages, different chain of command. It certainly helps to do a cross check but you will not be implementing the degree of QC performance, and results, without independence. Human factors, the things we cannot control, don't allow it. | |
| Sep 10, 2014 at 12:02 | comment | added | Péter Török | David, your points are indeed valid, however a) developers doing QA does not mean that everyone is testing his/her own work - as most teams include at least 2 devs, they can trivially cross-check each other's changes; b) testing skills can be trained and improved. Agile approaches don't compromise on quality, on the contrary. They see high quality as a foremost enabler of rapid, repeatable, stable deliveries and ultimately, customer satisfaction. | |
| Sep 10, 2014 at 11:48 | history | answered | David Espina | CC BY-SA 3.0 |