Problem: Unmonitored defects will turn into
technical debt
You have
found a bucket load of defects during testing, so far so good, but they need
constant care in order to avoid them ending up as technical debt.
Solution: Defect trend monitoring and tracking
You need to
arm your organization with a few good metrics that will give you an overview of
state of affairs and allow you to see trends in your defect database. There are
plenty of metrics to choose from, especially if you are using a modern defect
tracker, but in my experience less is more in this context.
Consider
the following metrics:
·
Defect
arrival rate: Graph that shows progress over time.
·
Severity
and priority spread: Pie that shows what severity and priority open defects
have
·
Defect
turnaround time & Defect ageing: Time from discovery until closure & time
since last update of the defect in your database.
Each of the
metrics will tell you something about the state of affairs in the item under
test, and here is what you should look for:
Defect
arrival rate:
I usually
just look at 3 lines, open, closed and total defects in order to get the
following information:
Total
defects:
·
Are
we testing? – Flatline means no.
·
Is
quality improving? – Slowdown in arrival either indicates that chances of meeting
release goals increases. If you do not see a slowdown in arrival in the weeks
prior to shipping the software you should expect a large volume of defects
found in production after golive.
Open/closed
defects:
·
Closure
rate - Is the gab between open and closed defects shrinking or increasing? Extrapolating
the trend will tell you if you can expect lots of known bugs to ship with
product or not. Something that comes in handy when doing expectation management
with the customer receiving the product.
Example:
·
It
seems that testers was not testing much in weeks 6-8, as total defects are
stable on 100
·
There
is a slowdown in defects from week 9 to 10, but this might just be coincidence,
so do not draw conclusions on trends until you see numbers from week 11.
·
Defect
closure rate seems constant, and open defects are dropping. This is healthy
if the product ships soon, and we assume that the test is nearing completion.
Severity
& Priority Spread:
Look for
high volumes of high priority or severity defects. In case you find yourself in
a situation where you have too many high ones then you need to stop and do a
bug triage, or you risk loosing the ability to use severity & priority to
steer your efforts. This is detailed in one of my previous posts found here:
Defect turnaround
time & ageing:
These two
metrics tells you something about your organization’s ability to process defects
found. What you should look for are
·
Do
we address our defects in a timely manner? Looking at time since last update
for defects with high severity and/or priority is interesting when talking to
customers and other stakeholders in a project. Furthermore this will help you
determine if there is a problem getting those critical ones fixed in due time.
·
Knowing
your defect fix rate or capacity will make it much easier when estimating for
future planning, meaning that you get some insight for the future.
Happy
defect monitoring!
/Nicolai
Hi guys,
ReplyDeleteGreat article, good to see it on Facebook via the Testing Club. I agree that a little tracking can help quite a lot.[1]
I disagree though that if there are no new defects, then the testers are slacking. It could be that they are testing testcases - and/or things are working as expected. That would be good right?
The graph of open defects interests me - how significant are the humps?
/Jesper
1: http://www.ministryoftesting.com/2011/07/a-little-track-history-that-goes-a-long-way/
2: http://www.ministryoftesting.com/2014/04/daily-defect-count-image-camel/
Hi Jesper!
DeleteThanks for the comment!
I think that the curvy trends seen for defects often is caused by significant raise in focus on verification and validation of the product just before closure and just after go-live. My experience is that it tends to be the discovery of defects that cause the humps in the graph and not the closure of defects. Most projects/delivery teams I have been working with seems to have a fairly stable defect correction rate.
Going back to my claim that flatline = no test, I find it unlikely that running test should reveal no defects – Keep in mind that this is not necessary a signal that “the testers are slacking”, but likely that they are doing something else than test execution. From experience there is always something that needs to be raised, even in situations where “things are working as expected” defects will just be fewer and with lower severity, but never absent.
As to the significance of the humps I find that all trends should be kept in mind when estimating. If you repeatable see this in your metrics it can go straight into your plans for staffing the teams as you will know when business analysts and developers will be needed for bug-fixing.
Have a nice weekend!
/Nicolai