1 / 12

Nodal Status Report: Quality Center Update

Nodal Status Report: Quality Center Update. Eileen Hall. Overview. Define strategy moving forward Demonstrate the consequences of insufficient testing durations Quality Center reports. Strategy Moving Forward. Revise schedules to provide sufficient test durations

jenniferbarnes
Download Presentation

Nodal Status Report: Quality Center Update

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Nodal Status Report:Quality Center Update Eileen Hall TPTF

  2. Overview • Define strategy moving forward • Demonstrate the consequences of insufficient testing durations • Quality Center reports Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  3. Strategy Moving Forward • Revise schedules to provide sufficient test durations • Include adequate testing time in appropriate environment to allow for earlier detection of defects to decrease defect resolution time • Include adequate time for patches • Include adequate time for regression testing • Deliver consistent defect management across program • Increase focus on integration test • Adhere to test phase exit criteria Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  4. Impacts of Insufficient Testing Duration • Impact analysis was conducted using early deliverables of the EMS project • Compared ratio of test time to development time of overall effort for two releases • 2C (lowest percentage of test time) • 3C (highest percentage of test time) • Reasons for using EMS project as case study • Ramp up time for testers not a factor • Large volume of historical data • Realistic data used during testing • In EDS for several releases Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  5. Disproportionate ratio of testing time to development EMS 2C: 30 weeks dev + 3 weeks test = 33 weeks effort (additional 26 weeks defect management) Development Defect Management (91.3%) ( additional 79.0%) Testing (8.7%) EMS 3C: 17 weeks dev + 11 weeks test = 28 weeks effort (additional 11 weeks defect management) Development Testing Defect Management (61.5%) (38.5%) (additional 40.0%) Lowest % Highest % Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  6. Number of weeks of test vs. number of weeks of defect management The longer the test duration, the shorter the defect management time (when number of weeks in test increases defect management time decreases) Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  7. Overall % of defect management time per EMS Release 66% Majority of overall defect fix time was expended in earlier releases. Defect management time has decreased over time as a result of longer test durations. Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  8. EMS defect turnaround time in EDS vs. FAT • Defect turnaround time is the average time it takes (in days) to resolve a defect • This time includes detection, analysis, fix and successful retest • Late detection of defects increases defect turnaround time • Current defect turnaround time for a defect detected during FAT is 51 days vs. a defect detected during EDS which is 73 days (43% longer) Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  9. Nodal Active Defects by Severity Trend Severity 3 defect trend is remaining relatively constant • Indicates that current defect close rate is equal to defect open rate • 28 severity 1, 159 severity 2, and 741 severity 3 defects are currently outstanding Severity 3 Severity 2 Severity 1 Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  10. Nodal Active Defects by Severity by Project • Number of Severity 3 defects remains high: • MMS has 247 Severity 3 defects • EMS has 186 Severity 3 defects • NMMS has 55 Severity 3 defects • OS has 54 Severity 3 defects Note – Includes New, Open, Reopen, Fixed and Test Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  11. Average Days to Fix FAT Severity (1, 2, 3) Defect by Vendor Defect turnaround time is one key indicator of vendor performance. Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

  12. Questions? Nodal Status Report - Quality Center

More Related