Defects are a serious issue, and even minor mistakes can lead to significant costs.
Upon discovering a defect, the standard procedure is known; it is either logged by using a Defect Tracker or Defect Management tool, or it is documented in an Excel spreadsheet. The fundamental methods remain unchanged regardless of the avenue taken.
Recommended IPTV Service Providers
- IPTVGREAT – Rating 4.8/5 ( 600+ Reviews )
- IPTVRESALE – Rating 5/5 ( 200+ Reviews )
- IPTVGANG – Rating 4.7/5 ( 1200+ Reviews )
- IPTVUNLOCK – Rating 5/5 ( 65 Reviews )
- IPTVFOLLOW -Rating 5/5 ( 48 Reviews )
- IPTVTOPS – Rating 5/5 ( 43 Reviews )
Defect Management tools do not guarantee excellent reporting. In these instances, effective methodologies are what save the day.
To acknowledge and appreciate outstanding practices, it’s essential first to recognize any shortcomings.
What You Will Learn:
The 3 Most Deplorable Defect Reporting Methods and How to Conquer Them
So, let’s delve in:
#1) Indolence
Failing to put in the appropriate effort towards the reporting procedure.
This is the process of defect tracking commonly adopted by many teams:
(Note – Click on any image to view a larger version)
As can be noted, the Test lead reviews the defects before they are dispatched from the QA teams.
This review entails examining:
- Validity- Is it genuinely a bug?
- Completeness- Title, steps, data, screenshots, and so on.
- Duplicates
- Reproducibility, etc.
I have firsthand experience that confirms the Test lead cannot be 100% thorough.
Thus, the mindset of “I’ll report the error in my own way. The QA lead can cross-check. They will determine if the defect is valid/complete or not” will ruin your team’s and your own credibility.
Are you aware that some clients have a Service Level Agreement (SLA) for an acceptable amount of invalid defects? When the maximum limit is crossed, the client begins to impose penalties on the contractors for every invalid defect reported?
Remedy: Conduct your due diligence and take charge of your deliverables. Did the defect get rejected because of inadequate information or because it was not a bug? The oversight might genuinely be from the QA team and not the development team. Make sure this does not recur.
#2) Hastiness
Allow me to offer an example.
Below is an image of OpenEMR’s patient creation screen. This is an open-source hospital management system.
This screen lets users input the patient’s birth date using a calendar function. Nonetheless, the input is not limited to choosing a date from the calendar. To clarify, you can select the DOB as “31-Mar-1983” from the calendar, and then change it to “31-Feb-1983.”
Why 31st February? This is a move to implement error guessing and test negative data in the field, which are key aspects of comprehensive testing, right?
After conducting the test, I press “Create Patient.” As the date is invalid, I expect the system to show an error message and not create the patient. However, the actual occurrence is contrary to my expectation. The system proceeds to create the patient.
Please pay attention to the Age and Date of Birth fields in the subsequent screenshot:
While testing, you might repeat this process numerous times and arrive at the conclusion that:
- It’s a bug.
- The problem is reproducible.
- It’s not a duplicate (confirm with your team).
- You can pinpoint the exact problem.
- You’re aware of the exact steps for replication.
Now that you have gathered the required information, you may move forward with the defect report. Deciding on the defect severity is a crucial step, and your team may reference a similar table:
Severity | Impact |
---|---|
1 (Critical) | • This defect can cause system crashes, file corruption, or plausible data loss. • It elicits an abnormal return to the operating system (crash or system failure messages). • It can cause application freezing, necessitating a system reboot. |
2 (High) | • It results in missing vital program functionality, albeit with an available workaround. |
3 (Medium) | • This defect detracts from the system’s quality. Nevertheless, there’s an alternative way to obtain the desired function (e.g., via another screen). • This defect impedes testing in several little product areas. However, other areas can still be tested independently. |
4 (Low) | • The error message is vague or inadequate, yet it has a marginal influence on product usage. |
5 (Cosmetic) | • The error message is unclear or inadequate, but it does not impact product usage. |
Considering that this defect doesn’t crash the system, doesn’t obstruct vital functionality, and doesn’t hinder other parts of the application testing, a “Low” severity might seem fitting.
Does this sound correct?
INCORRECT. The patient data indicates that all their immunizations and other reminders are overdue, which might not even be true. Additionally, a patient’s age plays a decisive role in whether they see a pediatrician or a general practitioner. It also influences medication dosages and several treatment areas that may go unnoticed.
Therefore, I would classify it as “High.” While I acknowledge that hospital staff are less likely to input an incorrect patient DOB, it should still factor into the priority of fixing the issue.
As a tester, my primary role is to convey the gravity of the problem effectively.
Remedy: Refrain from rushing the report. Ensure that you fully grasp the impact of the problems from varying aspects. This is the distinctive value that testers offer. We don’t simply state, “Something’s not right.” We also highlight, “This can occur if the malfunction persists.” The difference is significant, isn’t it?
#3) Absence of Imagination
Testers have an excellent chance to propose enhancements to software.
In your Defect Management tool, you have the option of submitting an “Enhancement Suggestion” type defect. Here is your opportunity to exercise your creativity.
Remedy:: Think creatively. If you perceive a certain feature is missing the “Wow” factor and if you have a potential solution for it, suggest it. The idea may be turned down, but that’s not the point. The crucial part is that you made an effort.
However, use this power wisely. Refrain from making comments like, “I detest the banner color. Please change it.”
Here’s a fantastic example of an enhancement suggestion that I encountered: Replace “Email to dealer” with “Chat with the dealer” option on a car dealership site for better sales conversion.
I wish I had such inventive ideas! But we can all aspire towards this.
As a bonus, here’s a checklist to conquer these negative habits:
1. Does my title accurately depict the problem?
Example: “Creating patient is not functioning” is an inadequate title. “Creating patient fails even when all input fields have correct data” is more fitting.
2. Is the problem reproducible?
In essence, does it happen consistently? Am I aware of the precise steps to replicate the problem?
3. Is the problem limited to a specific platform, browser, or user?
4. Are the steps comprehensive and leading to the issue in question?
5. Did I include a screenshot?
6. Should I annotate the screenshot to emphasize specific areas?
7. Is the filename of the image descriptive?
Bypass using general names like “Untitled.jpg.” Use a descriptive name instead.
8. Did I incorporate all necessary test data?
Example: If it’s a defect in the Admin module requiring authorization credentials, make sure to include them. The developer team might or might not have access to the QA environment. You don’t want any delays or follow-up due to such basic neglects.
9. Can I provide any additional information to strengthen my defect report?
(Example: reference to the FRD or an exchange of words with the client, etc.)
10. Do I comprehend the severity of the problem from different standpoints?
11. Do I understand the root cause of the problem? If yes, do I possess evidence (e.g., log files) to substantiate it? Note that you may not always know or need to identify the root cause, but when you do, it’s wise to include it.
12. Is the defect report devoid of grammatical, formatting, spelling, and punctuation errors?
13. Can I suggest any betterment for the product?
You may think this takes a lot of time. However, once it becomes habitual, it will cease to seem bothersome.
Advocating for enhanced defect reporting practices!
About the author: This article was written by Swati, a member of the STH team.
Feel free to leave your questions/comments below.