The document discusses the benefits of establishing testing as organizational infrastructure rather than tying it to individual projects. Viewing testing this way would provide centralized funding, allowing for more effective resource allocation across projects. It would remove testing from being compromised by projects' deadlines and priorities, instead allowing an independent testing function to enforce strict quality criteria for the entire organization. This approach aims to improve testing effectiveness, reduce costs, and increase confidence in software releases.

1. Created by:
IMPROVING THE
EFFECTIVENESS
OF TESTING
Tony Marks, Principal Test Manager, YBS Group
Testing as Infrastructure

2. ABOUT ME
Civilian apprenticeship in Electronics
(Ministry of Defence, 1991 – 1995)
In-store Repair Engineer (Mastercare, 1995 –
1998)
Production Test Engineer, Production Test
Supervisor, QA Manager, Product Manager
(Trilogy Communications, 1998 – 2012)
Test Manager, Principal Test Manager (YBS
Group, 2012 – present)

3. A FEW QUOTES
“If all you have is a hammer, everything
looks like a nail.”
The Psychology of
Science Abraham
Maslow (1966)
“If you always do what you’ve always done,
you’ll always get what you’ve always got.”
Unknown
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and
over again and expecting different results.”
Albert Einstein

4. CHALLENGES WITH PROJECT-FUNDED TESTING

5. CHALLENGES WITH PROJECT-FUNDED
TESTING
Project Managers have ultimate decision-
making powers
Typically (even in an agile SDLC), testing
happens at the end of the development cycle
Looming deadlines combined with late
delivery into Test results in reduced testing
time
 Increased cost (headcount)
 Reduced confidence (lower coverage)
The testing team are typically perceived as a
bottleneck by the rest of the project team

6. WHAT WOULD NEED TO CHANGE?

7. WHAT WOULD NEED TO CHANGE?
De-coupling the delivery of testing from the
project vehicle would remove Project
Managers’ ability to compromise testing
effectiveness
An independently funded Testing function
with extra-project reporting lines would
relieve the Project Managers of the
responsibility for testing

8. BENEFITS TO TESTING

9. BENEFITS TO TESTING
Independent ability to select and use the
most appropriate tools
Flexibility in assigning the most appropriate
resources at the appropriate times
Holistic view of the IT landscape
Ability to optimise testing by exploiting
synergies between projects

10. BENEFITS TO TESTING
Enhanced knowledge sharing capability
(spreading domain knowledge)
Increased confidence will take the test team
to greater heights, accepting greater
challenges and leading to higher quality
releases into live

11. BENEFITS TO TESTING
Reflect

12. BENEFITS TO THE BUSINESS

13. BENEFITS TO THE BUSINESS
An independent Testing function could
engage with projects when most value could
be added (as determined by Testing)
 E.g. Early static testing of functional and non-
functional requirements
Reduced overall cost of testing
 No longer relying on projects to fund testers
when there is little or nothing for them to do
Reduced threat to quality due to conflicting
project priorities

14. BENEFITS TO THE BUSINESS
Consistent standards and processes across
projects and the business
Independent assurance of the quality of
project deliverables
Testing as an independent entity will get
wider recognition and acceptance, enriching
the business/test relationship
 The business will appreciate Testing’s efforts to
act as a gatekeeper on their behalf
Increased trust in testing would engender a
healthier working culture

15. BENEFITS TO THE BUSINESS
Reflect

16. TESTING AS INFRASTRUCTURE

17. TESTING AS INFRASTRUCTURE
This is a Sync. Pulse Generator (SPG):
It is a critical piece of infrastructure in
broadcast facilities

18. TESTING AS INFRASTRUCTURE
SPG
 Enables real-time
synchronisation of multiple
sources of various formats
 Failure can be catastrophic:
 Equipment damage
 Broadcast interruption
 Negative consumer
experience
 Maintenance is required:
 Routine calibration
 Repairs
 Upgrades
Testing
 Test multiple projects and
changes simultaneously
 Failure can be catastrophic:
 Regulatory breach
 Reputational damage
 Privileged information loss
 Negative user experience
 Training is required:
 New technologies
 Cross-skilling
 Knowledge sharing

19. TESTING AS INFRASTRUCTURE
Reflect

20. SO HOW DO WE SELL IT?

21. SO HOW DO WE SELL IT?
Without a Testing function as infrastructure:
 Simple stand-alone pieces of work would
probably be OK (for a while at least)
 Complex integrations can be very costly and
time-consuming to support effectively due to the
limited scope of any individual project or
programme and unclear responsibilities
Headline project costs will be reduced as
funding for testing will be excluded

22. SO HOW DO WE SELL IT?
Project Managers will have one less headache
Testing resources will be more efficiently
utilised
An independent Testing function would
enable an organisation-wide view of the
entire estate, empowering the Testing
function to assign resources effectively and
assure suitable test coverage

23. SUMMARY

24. SUMMARY
Viewing Testing as an essential part of
organisational infrastructure provides a
different lens
Centralised funding would enable more
effective and efficient spending to the
benefit of the whole organisation
Quality cannot be compromised by individual
projects’ drivers
An independent Testing function would be
able to enforce strict quality criteria

25. THANK YOU!
Questions/discussion