1.
Core Systems Transformation Solutions
Shared position in a project:
testing and analysis
Polina Vorobieva
2013

2.
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
Resource allocation
Testing phase
Analysis phase
Common responsibilities
Difference in points of view
Shared position: pros and cons
1

3.
Resource allocation: Example
• Team




Manager
2 developers and Tech Lead
2 testers and Test Lead
Analyst
• PBL
Story
Release
Status
Story 7
1
Done
Story 8
1
Sprint 100 (implementation)
Story 9
1
Sprint 100 (implementation)
Story 10
2
Sprint 100 (analysis)
Story 11
2
No requirements
Story 12
2
No requirements
2

4.
Resource allocation: Example
3

5.
Resource allocation: Example
Story
Release
Status
Story 10
2
Sprint 101 (implementation)
Story 11
2
Sprint 101 (analysis)
Story 12
2
Sprint 101 (analysis)
Story 13
2
Sprint 101 (analysis)
4

6.
Resource allocation: Statistics
Stage
small/big story, h Average, h
Analysis
18-92
High Level Design
10-36
Implementation (Coding and Testing) 15-60
Small story
Analysi
s35 %
Design
20 %
Code &
Test
45%
35-50
25-30
20-60
Big story
Analysi
s45 %
Code &
Test
25%
Design
30 %
5

7.
Resource allocation: RISKS
•
•
•
•
•
•
Diseases
Vacations
Attrition
Ramp down
Project demands
Demotivation
6

8.
Resource allocation: progress
• Growth
o Lead/Manager
o Improve technical skills
o Improve analytical skills
7

9.
Testing phase
• What are the Tester’s responsibilities?
o
o
o
o
o
o
Requirements analysis
Test planning
Test development
Test execution
Test result analysis
Defect Tracking
8

10.
Analysis phase
• What are the Analyst’s responsibilities?
o
o
o
o
o
o
Requirements planning and management
Requirements communication and analysis
Solution assessment and validation
Document the requirements
Test cases review
Improvements of process
9

11.
Common responsibilities
• Requirements analysis/Requirements testing
• The main question: How it should work?
(Output for Analyst and Input for Tester)
• Collaboration:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Communication with Customer
Determination of Customer needs
Requirements clarification
Integration (and other non-functional testing)
Acceptance testing/UAT team
Knowledge sharing
10

12.
Difference in points of view
• Paint the rose
11

13.
Difference in points of view
• Feasibility determination
• Solution for implementation
 Impact assessment
 Analysis of all options
 Responsibility




‘Common language’
Effective communication
Identification of Customer’s needs
Increase Customer’s satisfaction
12

14.
Difference in points of view
•
•
•
•
Requirements analysis
Test approach
Test scenario/cases
Test execution
13

15.
Difference in points of view
• Main items to pay attention for Tester:
o Technical aspects, details of implementation
o Domain knowledge
o Assess of impact
14

16.
Difference in points of view
Analyst
Tester
What for?
Can we do it?
How should we do it?
Can we propose anything?
What are the requirements?
What is the potential impact for the
whole system?
How was it done?
What is the impact?
How do we test it?
What is the impact of each issue?
How many issues do we have?
15

17.
Shared positions
• Pros
•
•








Cons


Issues


Interchangeability
Sharing knowledge
Team work
Responsibility
Growth
Motivation
Risk reduction
Effectiveness
Individual
Switch between tasks
High load
Possibility of miscommunication
16

18.
Conclusion
• Benefits if applicable
17

19.
Questions
18