Dr. Richter's 35-Year Journey Through IT Success: Imagine launching a groundbreaking software platform, only to watch it crumble under the weight of bugs, crashes, and frustrated users. For over 35 years, I’ve witnessed this scenario unfold in IT projects of all sizes - from nimble startups to sprawling enterprise systems. The culprit? A pervasive underestimation of Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Management (QM). Time and again, I’ve seen teams slash budgets for testing, only to pay a steeper price later in costly fixes, tarnished reputations, and lost opportunities. Here’s why QA isn’t just a checkbox - it’s the backbone of any successful IT project, and why ignoring it is a gamble no one can afford.
Dr. Uwe Richter shares his views about the key values to establish a successful software business in his blog article.
In the high-stakes world of IT, cost pressures often push QA to the chopping block. When testing happens, it’s frequently reduced to basic checks, like JUnit tests that confirm a function runs but miss the bigger picture. These tests might verify a single piece of code but rarely capture how components interact or whether the system delivers for end-users. Integration tests, which probe how multiple parts of a system work together, are a rarity. Even scarcer are end-to-end tests that simulate real-world workflows, ensuring the software performs as promised from start to finish.
The result? Software that looks polished in the lab but falters in the wild. I’ve seen projects grind to a halt because critical business processes failed under real-world conditions, costing companies millions in downtime and eroded trust. The irony is stark: cutting corners on QA doesn’t save money - it multiplies expenses.
Here’s a hard truth: developers shouldn’t test their own work. In 99% of projects, they do. Why? It’s cheaper and faster - at least on paper. But this practice is riddled with pitfalls. Developers know their code intimately, which sounds like an advantage but often breeds operational blindness. They test what they expect to work, sidestepping edge cases or flaws they’ve unconsciously overlooked. It’s human nature to avoid probing the weak spots you’ve built, but it’s a recipe for disaster.
When external testers are brought in, budget constraints often lead to hiring junior resources - think early-semester students or entry-level staff. They’re affordable but lack the battle-tested insight to navigate complex system architectures or anticipate failure scenarios. True test engineers - seasoned professionals who’ve built, deployed, and debugged software for years - are a rare breed. Their absence leaves gaps in test planning, shallow test cases, and missed opportunities to catch defects early.
Even dedicated internal QA teams face a subtle but pervasive challenge: bias. As company insiders, they’re part of the same ecosystem as the developers. This can create a conflict of loyalty, where testers hesitate to flag critical issues out of fear of rocking the boat. I’ve seen reports softened and red flags downplayed, especially under tight deadlines or in tense project climates. It takes extraordinary integrity - and often top-level backing - to call out deal-breaking flaws without sugarcoating.
External testers, by contrast, bring a fresh, unbiased lens. Free from internal politics or ingrained assumptions, they challenge the status quo and dig into areas others might avoid. Their independence ensures candid, actionable feedback, untainted by loyalty or fear of repercussions.
Robust QA isn’t just about people - it’s about systems. Automated test suites that cover entire workflows, achieve 90 %+ test coverage, and feed transparent results into tools like Jira with Xray are game-changers. Yet, they’re dismissed as too costly or complex. In reality, they’re investments that pay dividends. Automated tests catch regressions, streamline debugging, and provide a clear picture of a system’s health. Without them, teams are flying blind, hoping manual checks will suffice - until they don’t.
The numbers tell a brutal story. Fixing bugs in production can cost 10-100 times more than catching them during development. Downtime from faulty software can bleed revenue, with some outages costing enterprises millions per hour. Then there’s the intangible hit: a damaged reputation that drives customers to competitors. I’ve seen companies scramble to patch flawed systems while their stock plummets and headlines blare their failures. These aren’t hypotheticals - they’re real-world wake-up calls.
Contrast that with a project I consulted on where QA was prioritized from day one. Dedicated test engineers, a mix of internal and external experts, designed comprehensive test suites covering unit, integration, and end-to-end scenarios. Automated tests run nightly, flagging issues before they snowball. The result? A smooth launch, glowing user feedback, and a platform still thriving a decade later. The upfront investment in QA shaved millions off the total project cost by avoiding post-release chaos.
So, how do we break the cycle of QA neglect? Start by treating QA as a distinct discipline, not an afterthought. Above a certain project size - say, anything with more than 10 developers or six months of work - QA deserves its own team, budget, and leadership. This team should include experienced test engineers, ideally a blend of internal domain experts and external specialists.
Why external? Beyond their unbiased perspective, external testers bring cross-industry insights. They’ve seen patterns of failure across projects and can spot risks others miss, from performance bottlenecks to security vulnerabilities. Their efficiency, honed by years of crafting precise test cases, saves developer time and catches defects earlier, when fixes are cheaper. Plus, their reports carry weight: a third-party quality certificate from a reputable firm isn’t just a badge - it’s a trust signal for customers and investors.
IT projects aren’t static. Business needs evolve, and late-stage changes can upend months of work. Without disciplined change management, these shifts can fracture a system’s architecture. QA plays a critical role here. Testers, with their deep system knowledge, can assess change impacts and adjust test strategies on the fly. By embedding QA in the change process, teams catch ripple effects early, before a “small tweak” becomes a project-killer.
For some organizations, building an in-house QA team is daunting. Enter outsourcing. Specialized QA firms offer turnkey solutions: seasoned testers, proven methodologies, and seamless integration with your tools (think ALM, Jira/Xray, Testiny, TestQuality, TestRail, Zephyr, etc.). They deliver regular, transparent reports and can issue certified quality assessments at key milestones - powerful proof of your software’s reliability. Outsourcing doesn’t mean losing control; it means gaining expertise and objectivity without the overhead of a full-time team.
Building top-notch software doesn’t have to be a struggle. At NUCIDA, we’ve cracked the code with our B/R/AI/N Testwork testing solution - pairing our QA expertise with your test management tool to deliver streamlined processes, slick automation, and results you can count on. On time. Hassle-free. Ready to ditch future headaches? Let NUCIDA show you how!
NUCIDA QA experts are Testiny, SmartBear, TestRail, and Xray certified consultants.
Why Choose NUCIDA?
For us, digitization does not just mean modernizing what already exists but, most importantly, reshaping the future. That is why we have made it our goal to provide our customers with sustainable support in digitizing the entire value chain. Our work has only one goal: your success!
Don’t let testing slow you down. Explore how consulting services can make your software quality soar - headache-free! Got questions? We’ve got answers. Let’s build something amazing together!
After 35 years in the trenches, I’ve learned this: QA isn’t a cost - it’s a catalyst. It’s the difference between a product that limps along and one that dominates its market. Investing in experienced testers, robust automation, and independent perspectives doesn’t just reduce risks - it unlocks innovation. When developers trust that their code is battle-tested, they’re freer to experiment and push boundaries. When customers trust your software, they become advocates, not critics.
The choice is clear. Skimp on QA, and you’re rolling the dice with your project’s future. Embrace it, and you’re building a foundation for success - reliable, efficient, and ready to scale. In an industry where trust is currency, quality assurance is the mint. Don’t just aim to deliver - deliver with confidence.
Want to know more? Watch our YouTube video, Quality Assurance vs. Quality Control, explaining to you the differences between the two approaches.
Pictures from pixabay.com and NUCIDA Group
Article written by Dr. Uwe Richter; published by Torsten Zimmermann