Evaluate Acceptance Result and Address Defects
"Evaluate Acceptance Results and Address Defects" pertains to the analysis of outcomes from a juxtaposition between the set acceptance criteria and the solution. The primary advantage of executing this process is to make well-informed determinations on the release of the whole or a segment of a solution, and whether there's a necessity for alterations, rectifications, or enhancements.
Understanding the Process
This procedure emphasizes contrasting the acceptance criteria with the acceptance testing results. The objective is to provide guidance on addressing instances where some facets of a solution might not meet its designated acceptance criteria. The scope of this testing can range from a comprehensive solution release to just a single business scenario, which could be derived from multiple user stories.
Notably, the emphasis is on the outcomes of the comparison rather than the tests themselves. This distinction aligns with the prevalent industry practice where roles involved in business analysis are separate from those handling testing. While the testing roles usually handle the pass/fail aspect, business analysis is crucial to gauge the scale and severity of defects, deduce their root cause, recognize associated risks, and put forth suggestions to rectify them. Within these recommendations, business impacts, repair costs, or workaround costs are assessed alongside the implications and costs of rolling out the solution without addressing existing defects.
Sources of Test Results
Test outcomes vital for evaluating acceptance criteria might originate from:
- Exploratory tests and user acceptance tests.
- Day-in-the-life (DITL) tests.
- Preproduction or simulated production testing.
- Functionality tests within a scenario.
- Nonfunctional requirements tests. For an in-depth exploration of testing methodologies, one should refer to Section 6.6 of the Business Analysis for Practitioners: A Practice Guide.
In settings like manufacturing or construction that have consistent monitoring and acceptance testing, any discrepancies between outcomes and criteria are evaluated to discern trends. For software solutions with automated regression testing in place, there's an opportunity to identify patterns in results that don't meet the criteria.
Evaluation Steps
The process of evaluation encompasses pinpointing the core cause of any disparity or flaw. This could lead to a cost-benefit analysis of addressing the defect. Suggested ways to handle the defect might encompass:
- Feasible workarounds that don't affect other functionalities or result in unexpected product behaviors.
- Potential product modifications, possibly necessitating a change request.
- Adjustments in measurement techniques or results.
- Recognizing the need for a deeper dive into the technical origins of the flaw.
- Informing customers and users to ensure correct product usage.
Typically, the evaluation and addressing of defects transpire whenever there's a need for a go/no-go or release decision regarding a solution component. However, it can also take place when addressing product flaws detected post solution deployment.
Inputs
Acceptance Criteria
Acceptance criteria outline the specific conditions that need to be met for a product or solution to be accepted by stakeholders. These criteria offer a clear description of the functionality, performance, and other attributes the final deliverable should possess to satisfy stakeholder expectations.
Actual Acceptance Results
Actual acceptance results represent the actual observations and outcomes derived when the acceptance tests are executed. These results indicate whether the product or solution has met the stipulated acceptance criteria and are integral in deciding if further iterations or refinements are required.
Tools and Techniques
Prioritization Schemes
Prioritization schemes are methods used to assign relative importance or urgency to different items, such as defects or changes. These schemes ensure that the most critical items are addressed first, optimizing the allocation of resources and time.
Root Cause Analysis
Root cause analysis is a problem-solving technique aimed at identifying the fundamental reasons behind a defect or issue. By addressing the root cause, one can prevent the recurrence of the same problem in future iterations or versions of the product.
Traceability Matrix
A traceability matrix is a tool that maps and tracks requirements throughout the project lifecycle. It assists in ensuring that all requirements are met and provides a foundation to determine the origins of defects, helping to pinpoint areas needing correction.
Variance Analysis
Variance analysis is the process of comparing actual results with expected results to identify discrepancies. In the context of acceptance results, this technique helps in understanding deviations from the acceptance criteria and facilitates appropriate corrective actions.
Outputs
Evaluated Acceptance Results
Evaluated acceptance results provide a consolidated view of how the actual acceptance results stack up against the established acceptance criteria. These evaluated results highlight areas of the product that have met the acceptance standards and those that need further refinement.