An overstretched development team can be prone to making more mistakes, which incur costs and lead to even more testing. In our approach to QA, we seek to improve your capacity for dealing with software issues. The test cases we write are clear and simple to follow, even for non-tech people, so it’s easier to prioritise issues and deal with them quickly.
There’s a risk when you allow developers to ‘mark their own homework’. A fresh set of eyes will catch errors that the web developers won’t see. Independent testing gives you peace of mind that nothing’s been overlooked or hidden.
Outsourcing your testing can bring economies of scale, efficiency and speed. It gives you access to a large variety of testing techniques and resources. If you have a small internal team you may not be able to do the breadth or depth of testing you really need before releasing a digital product. Outsourcing your test may save you money because you can apply the right type of testing at exactly the time you need it, without holding up development. You may be able to perform the testing earlier in the software development lifecycle too. Recruiting experienced testers can be hard. Outsourcing your testing takes that headache away.
No. We use crowdsourced testing for some services, like exploratory testing, executing test cases and accessibility testing. We combine human testing with automated testing, depending on the specific need. But we also support clients with usability testing, test strategy and planning through our team augmentation service. And we provide people to augment client teams, both short-term and long-term.
Our testing capabilities are listed here. We cover a broad range including regression testing, accessibility testing, test automation, usability testing and more. We provide consultancy, service management and team augmentation. We deliver crowdtesting through our global Digivante professional tester community.
No. We think automation brings benefits specifically in unit testing, integration and where continuous improvement/ continuous development (CI/CD) is used.
We recommend only automating stable areas that are easy to maintain.
Automation is just one weapon in the QA armory. We recommend a nuanced approach: supplement automated testing with other QA approaches including planning, manual and crowd testing, user and accessibility testing. We recommend looking at the whole, not just focusing on automation alone.
No. Only automate stable entities with repeatable actions. Choose cases where there isn’t much change, to avoid higher maintenance costs and gaps in automation coverage.
No. We recommend fully integrating them with the whole QA team. Ideally, use the same team for automation and crowd testing, so they’re governed by one QA process.
Yes. As well as knowing what’s being automated, you need to know the coverage achieved. That way you can identify what you need to test by other means.
At Digivante we create the very best manual test cases and coverage. They form the building blocks for good automation. These will show clearly whether it’s beneficial to automate or not.
It depends how thorough the consultant can be. Just one person can’t usually do it all! At Digivante we’re transparent on the framework we use and how we build the scripts. We make clear which tests are automated, crowd or manual. We provide clear documentation and training for internal staff.
Triage is key. It’s one of our key strengths. We look at failed builds then run any failed automation test cases in our community, clearly highlighting false positives/negatives and explaining issues. Then you can prioritise effective fixes.
