Page 284 -
P. 284

It’s even harder to keep your commitment to software quality when a small change is
                          made to a product that is already in production and rolled out to clients. It’s very tempting
                          to “just make the change” and run a cursory test (for example, testing only the fix itself or
                          smoke testing only a few “core” areas of the software). If you stop to think about it, how-
                          ever, it’s even more important to run a full regression test when making even a small
                          change to a product that’s already been rolled out. The users already have a good feeling
                          about the software and expect it to keep meeting their needs. It’s one thing to deliver a
                          poor quality product from the beginning; it’s quite another to replace software that’s
                          already working with software that’s buggy. There’s no easier way to upset your users and
                          make your team look incompetent.

                          The point is that if you want to release software that will satisfy your users and stakehold-
                          ers, then your off-site team needs your support, and your commitment to quality must be
                          unwavering. If time is a real constraint, you should use proper planning. People in your
                          organization must review and understand the test approach the vendor will take. Don’t
                          ever commit to deadlines that don’t include estimates for software testing. (And always
                          assume there will be multiple iterations of testing—it’s foolish to assume there will be no
                          defects and the first test will be the last!) If the estimated project plan runs past the dead-
                          line, cut the scope—not just the testing. Work with your QA team to identify time-con-
                          suming activities that can be automated or made more efficient.
                          Finally, don’t just assume that just because the vendor’s organization meets certain certifi-
                          cations or has been assessed (CMM Level 5, ISO 9000, Six Sigma—see Chapter 12), it
                          means that they know better than you do how to run your project. Don’t assume that the
                          vendor never cuts corners. A good track record for past projects does not necessarily trans-
                          late to a similar performance on your project. Even when you are working with a certified
                          vendor, you still need to take responsibility for your portion of the work.






























                   276  CHAPTER ELEVEN
   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289