QA aims to provide transparent communication and evaluation from project inception to release to meet customer expectations. Transparency should begin with the CIO and involve the entire team to commit to delivering a product that meets or exceeds customer needs. Limiting QA to only testing removes this transparency; instead QA should understand customer needs and ensure they are addressed throughout development in collaboration with UX and programming. Clear expectations and open communication between QA, UX and programming can help solve many problems before they occur.

1. Software Quality Assurance Made
Evident
Successful quality assurance (QA) looks for to offer an unambiguous and realistic model for
meeting the client's expectations. In this background, "transparent" QA will take up a policy of
steady communication and evaluation from the top-down about all business decisions, testing,
hiring, and user experience (UX). In toting up, transparent QA will endeavor to anticipate and
avert problems before they occur and do so from the project's initial stages, throughout
development, and subsequent to release.
The transparency ought to begin with the CIO and filter down through the entire team. QA
should be considered as a business choice to commit the company to the delivery of a product
that congregates or exceeds the customers' expectations. This decision must clear itself from
the project's inception, beginning with the recognition of the customer's needs and the means
with which the project will attend them. Ideally, this will fill an as-yet-unfilled demand, or fill it
in a more well-organized way. These expectations must be comprehensible, pragmatic, and
made transparent to anyone involved in the project. Furtive, ambiguities, or unnecessary delays
will only cripple the project at its onset.
There also exists a likely tendency to reduce QA to a software testing role. Limiting QA to a
simple "black box" role despoils it of its transparency by removing the need for it. Black-box
testing purely guarantees a certain output produces the desired output without understanding
of the program's inner workings in an attempt to mimic the typical user. It is one of the main
inexpensive forms of testing, thus the enticement. Though it has its set, it abandons the top-
down, all-encompassing approach of transparent QA. For instance, black-box QA will be denied
the opportunity to apply the client’s needs to the hiring process for UX engineers, or even to
place their detailed needs into a publicized job posting. As another example, black-box QA
might verify input-output functionality, but overlook UX and discover too late that the market
despises the user interface (UI).

2. UX works with QA to present consumers with a optimistic experience, and transparency must be
marked on both sides to succeed. If QA's role is to recognize the customers' needs, upfront
objectives, and technical issues, then UX works to make sure the team's solutions translate into
a pleasant experience for the users. In process, UX focuses on the UI by group testing,
analyzing usage data, and making propositions to the QA team based on user feedback. If QA
falls short to consider the market's needs or properly commune them to the UX team, then
procedures like group testing and data analytics will be exasperating and expensive to
implement.
Clear expectations and open two-way communication between QA, UX, and programmers will to
a great extent solve problems before they occur. Anticipation saves money, time, and effort.
Delivering a relatively bug-free product is only one surface of a successful launch; companies
must depend on QA to identify the customers' needs at the project's conception and to maintain
a spirit of collaboration between all team members.