Why do testers need root cause analysis?Role of Quality Assurance (Not testing!) in AgileHow testing and inspections can fulfill quality requirements?How to assess QA employee performance?Good practices for finding valid issues in exploratory testing?How to determine applications that are valid candidates for UI Regression/Automation Testing?Quality assurance when people's lives are at stakeValidating adherence to software architecture/design after implementationWhy should a software QA engineer need to learn JavaScript?What is the difference between Quality assurance engineer and a tester?Multiple Scrum Teams - How Can I Make Use of QA?
On the Twin Paradox Again
Is it legal in the UK for politicians to lie to the public for political gain?
Why did Hela need Heimdal's sword?
How can I instantiate a lambda closure type in C++11/14?
Completing the square to find if quadratic form is positive definite.
Are the AT-AT's from "Empire Strikes Back" a deliberate reference to Mecha?
What happens to foam insulation board after you pour concrete slab?
Is the decompression of compressed and encrypted data without decryption also theoretically impossible?
What makes linear regression with polynomial features curvy?
How to pass a regex when finding a directory path in bash?
Why is c4 bad when playing the London against a King's Indian?
Why don’t airliners have temporary liveries?
You've spoiled/damaged the card
Implement Homestuck's Catenative Doomsday Dice Cascader
Identification quotas - TIKZ LaTeX
Can a magnetic field of an object be stronger than its gravity?
Bent spoke design wheels — feasible?
Importance sampling estimation of power function
Does the growth of home value benefit from compound interest?
When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
Why is the relationship between frequency and pitch exponential?
Reading two lines in piano
Company did not petition for visa in a timely manner. Is asking me to work from overseas, but wants me to take a paycut
What's the correct term for a waitress in the Middle Ages?
Why do testers need root cause analysis?
Role of Quality Assurance (Not testing!) in AgileHow testing and inspections can fulfill quality requirements?How to assess QA employee performance?Good practices for finding valid issues in exploratory testing?How to determine applications that are valid candidates for UI Regression/Automation Testing?Quality assurance when people's lives are at stakeValidating adherence to software architecture/design after implementationWhy should a software QA engineer need to learn JavaScript?What is the difference between Quality assurance engineer and a tester?Multiple Scrum Teams - How Can I Make Use of QA?
Why do testers need root cause analysis? I understand what it is but can't fathom how to describe a connection. How does the definition of root cause analysis change in terms of QA?
quality-assurance
add a comment |
Why do testers need root cause analysis? I understand what it is but can't fathom how to describe a connection. How does the definition of root cause analysis change in terms of QA?
quality-assurance
9
I guess the counter to that is "Why bother testing if you're not going to fix it? And how do you fix it without figuring out how it happened in the first place?"
– corsiKa♦
May 19 at 20:21
9
Why does anyone, in any industry, need to understand and solve the actual problem instead of just patching the symptom and hoping for the best?
– jonrsharpe
May 19 at 21:20
2
really? I don't believe you genuinely cannot fathom why it's a good idea to find out why something happened.
– Emobe
May 20 at 11:34
unboundedness vs boundedness are, analytically speaking,arbitrary.
– RIzaa
May 20 at 15:25
add a comment |
Why do testers need root cause analysis? I understand what it is but can't fathom how to describe a connection. How does the definition of root cause analysis change in terms of QA?
quality-assurance
Why do testers need root cause analysis? I understand what it is but can't fathom how to describe a connection. How does the definition of root cause analysis change in terms of QA?
quality-assurance
quality-assurance
asked May 19 at 18:56
Seeker001Seeker001
15127
15127
9
I guess the counter to that is "Why bother testing if you're not going to fix it? And how do you fix it without figuring out how it happened in the first place?"
– corsiKa♦
May 19 at 20:21
9
Why does anyone, in any industry, need to understand and solve the actual problem instead of just patching the symptom and hoping for the best?
– jonrsharpe
May 19 at 21:20
2
really? I don't believe you genuinely cannot fathom why it's a good idea to find out why something happened.
– Emobe
May 20 at 11:34
unboundedness vs boundedness are, analytically speaking,arbitrary.
– RIzaa
May 20 at 15:25
add a comment |
9
I guess the counter to that is "Why bother testing if you're not going to fix it? And how do you fix it without figuring out how it happened in the first place?"
– corsiKa♦
May 19 at 20:21
9
Why does anyone, in any industry, need to understand and solve the actual problem instead of just patching the symptom and hoping for the best?
– jonrsharpe
May 19 at 21:20
2
really? I don't believe you genuinely cannot fathom why it's a good idea to find out why something happened.
– Emobe
May 20 at 11:34
unboundedness vs boundedness are, analytically speaking,arbitrary.
– RIzaa
May 20 at 15:25
9
9
I guess the counter to that is "Why bother testing if you're not going to fix it? And how do you fix it without figuring out how it happened in the first place?"
– corsiKa♦
May 19 at 20:21
I guess the counter to that is "Why bother testing if you're not going to fix it? And how do you fix it without figuring out how it happened in the first place?"
– corsiKa♦
May 19 at 20:21
9
9
Why does anyone, in any industry, need to understand and solve the actual problem instead of just patching the symptom and hoping for the best?
– jonrsharpe
May 19 at 21:20
Why does anyone, in any industry, need to understand and solve the actual problem instead of just patching the symptom and hoping for the best?
– jonrsharpe
May 19 at 21:20
2
2
really? I don't believe you genuinely cannot fathom why it's a good idea to find out why something happened.
– Emobe
May 20 at 11:34
really? I don't believe you genuinely cannot fathom why it's a good idea to find out why something happened.
– Emobe
May 20 at 11:34
unboundedness vs boundedness are, analytically speaking,arbitrary.
– RIzaa
May 20 at 15:25
unboundedness vs boundedness are, analytically speaking,arbitrary.
– RIzaa
May 20 at 15:25
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
When a defect happens, you want to analyse how it happend. So you can decide if you can prevent similar issues in the future. I would use a simple root-cause analysis for that. Maybe you want to involve other stakeholders like users, developers, managers, etc...
I think it is part of the QA role to make sure preventive actions happen, as we
are a force for continuous improvement, helping the team adapt and
optimize in order to succeed, rather than providing a safety net to
catch failures.
moderntesting.org
add a comment |
As a tester, you are never trying to fix the problem you are looking at. You're looking to fix the systemic problem which affects thousands or millions of units which you will never look at directly.
The "root cause" is the cause which is most likely to be addressable in such a systemic manner, or alternatively, most likely to be dismissable as not being systemic.
add a comment |
Root Cause Analysis enables prevention of problems, by analyzing problems that happened in the past. As a QA focusing on corrective measures of root causes is more effective than simply treating the symptoms of a problem or event which helps us to encounter more issue for same defect under defect clustering & perform effectively when accomplish through a systematic process with conclusions backed up by evidence, usually there are more than one root cause for any problem or event & we should investigate every cause so that the focus of investigation and analysis through problem identification of event occurred.
add a comment |
I can give you an example from automotive embedded projects. Assume you do a hardware-in-the-loop test of an electronic control unit and you assume you found an issue.
Now, theoretically, it is enough to show the expected and real result and reference the test case leading to it.
However, taking into account you had time- and value-continuous hardware signals, being processed by an software running on a hardware which is not synchronous to the test system and 6MB RAM for static variables in the electronic control unit, it requires often a lot of data to root-cause this.
Always recording everything is not feasible, so you have to plan your "measurements" for each test case or even for individual test steps.
Even then, you might have to retry because this would be more recording capacity than your hardware has.
Last is that your test system itself might have an issue, like loose wires.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "244"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsqa.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39243%2fwhy-do-testers-need-root-cause-analysis%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
When a defect happens, you want to analyse how it happend. So you can decide if you can prevent similar issues in the future. I would use a simple root-cause analysis for that. Maybe you want to involve other stakeholders like users, developers, managers, etc...
I think it is part of the QA role to make sure preventive actions happen, as we
are a force for continuous improvement, helping the team adapt and
optimize in order to succeed, rather than providing a safety net to
catch failures.
moderntesting.org
add a comment |
When a defect happens, you want to analyse how it happend. So you can decide if you can prevent similar issues in the future. I would use a simple root-cause analysis for that. Maybe you want to involve other stakeholders like users, developers, managers, etc...
I think it is part of the QA role to make sure preventive actions happen, as we
are a force for continuous improvement, helping the team adapt and
optimize in order to succeed, rather than providing a safety net to
catch failures.
moderntesting.org
add a comment |
When a defect happens, you want to analyse how it happend. So you can decide if you can prevent similar issues in the future. I would use a simple root-cause analysis for that. Maybe you want to involve other stakeholders like users, developers, managers, etc...
I think it is part of the QA role to make sure preventive actions happen, as we
are a force for continuous improvement, helping the team adapt and
optimize in order to succeed, rather than providing a safety net to
catch failures.
moderntesting.org
When a defect happens, you want to analyse how it happend. So you can decide if you can prevent similar issues in the future. I would use a simple root-cause analysis for that. Maybe you want to involve other stakeholders like users, developers, managers, etc...
I think it is part of the QA role to make sure preventive actions happen, as we
are a force for continuous improvement, helping the team adapt and
optimize in order to succeed, rather than providing a safety net to
catch failures.
moderntesting.org
answered May 19 at 19:57
Niels van ReijmersdalNiels van Reijmersdal
22.4k23382
22.4k23382
add a comment |
add a comment |
As a tester, you are never trying to fix the problem you are looking at. You're looking to fix the systemic problem which affects thousands or millions of units which you will never look at directly.
The "root cause" is the cause which is most likely to be addressable in such a systemic manner, or alternatively, most likely to be dismissable as not being systemic.
add a comment |
As a tester, you are never trying to fix the problem you are looking at. You're looking to fix the systemic problem which affects thousands or millions of units which you will never look at directly.
The "root cause" is the cause which is most likely to be addressable in such a systemic manner, or alternatively, most likely to be dismissable as not being systemic.
add a comment |
As a tester, you are never trying to fix the problem you are looking at. You're looking to fix the systemic problem which affects thousands or millions of units which you will never look at directly.
The "root cause" is the cause which is most likely to be addressable in such a systemic manner, or alternatively, most likely to be dismissable as not being systemic.
As a tester, you are never trying to fix the problem you are looking at. You're looking to fix the systemic problem which affects thousands or millions of units which you will never look at directly.
The "root cause" is the cause which is most likely to be addressable in such a systemic manner, or alternatively, most likely to be dismissable as not being systemic.
answered May 19 at 21:34
Cort AmmonCort Ammon
29412
29412
add a comment |
add a comment |
Root Cause Analysis enables prevention of problems, by analyzing problems that happened in the past. As a QA focusing on corrective measures of root causes is more effective than simply treating the symptoms of a problem or event which helps us to encounter more issue for same defect under defect clustering & perform effectively when accomplish through a systematic process with conclusions backed up by evidence, usually there are more than one root cause for any problem or event & we should investigate every cause so that the focus of investigation and analysis through problem identification of event occurred.
add a comment |
Root Cause Analysis enables prevention of problems, by analyzing problems that happened in the past. As a QA focusing on corrective measures of root causes is more effective than simply treating the symptoms of a problem or event which helps us to encounter more issue for same defect under defect clustering & perform effectively when accomplish through a systematic process with conclusions backed up by evidence, usually there are more than one root cause for any problem or event & we should investigate every cause so that the focus of investigation and analysis through problem identification of event occurred.
add a comment |
Root Cause Analysis enables prevention of problems, by analyzing problems that happened in the past. As a QA focusing on corrective measures of root causes is more effective than simply treating the symptoms of a problem or event which helps us to encounter more issue for same defect under defect clustering & perform effectively when accomplish through a systematic process with conclusions backed up by evidence, usually there are more than one root cause for any problem or event & we should investigate every cause so that the focus of investigation and analysis through problem identification of event occurred.
Root Cause Analysis enables prevention of problems, by analyzing problems that happened in the past. As a QA focusing on corrective measures of root causes is more effective than simply treating the symptoms of a problem or event which helps us to encounter more issue for same defect under defect clustering & perform effectively when accomplish through a systematic process with conclusions backed up by evidence, usually there are more than one root cause for any problem or event & we should investigate every cause so that the focus of investigation and analysis through problem identification of event occurred.
edited May 20 at 11:28
answered May 20 at 8:13
Nitin RastogiNitin Rastogi
2,95311441
2,95311441
add a comment |
add a comment |
I can give you an example from automotive embedded projects. Assume you do a hardware-in-the-loop test of an electronic control unit and you assume you found an issue.
Now, theoretically, it is enough to show the expected and real result and reference the test case leading to it.
However, taking into account you had time- and value-continuous hardware signals, being processed by an software running on a hardware which is not synchronous to the test system and 6MB RAM for static variables in the electronic control unit, it requires often a lot of data to root-cause this.
Always recording everything is not feasible, so you have to plan your "measurements" for each test case or even for individual test steps.
Even then, you might have to retry because this would be more recording capacity than your hardware has.
Last is that your test system itself might have an issue, like loose wires.
add a comment |
I can give you an example from automotive embedded projects. Assume you do a hardware-in-the-loop test of an electronic control unit and you assume you found an issue.
Now, theoretically, it is enough to show the expected and real result and reference the test case leading to it.
However, taking into account you had time- and value-continuous hardware signals, being processed by an software running on a hardware which is not synchronous to the test system and 6MB RAM for static variables in the electronic control unit, it requires often a lot of data to root-cause this.
Always recording everything is not feasible, so you have to plan your "measurements" for each test case or even for individual test steps.
Even then, you might have to retry because this would be more recording capacity than your hardware has.
Last is that your test system itself might have an issue, like loose wires.
add a comment |
I can give you an example from automotive embedded projects. Assume you do a hardware-in-the-loop test of an electronic control unit and you assume you found an issue.
Now, theoretically, it is enough to show the expected and real result and reference the test case leading to it.
However, taking into account you had time- and value-continuous hardware signals, being processed by an software running on a hardware which is not synchronous to the test system and 6MB RAM for static variables in the electronic control unit, it requires often a lot of data to root-cause this.
Always recording everything is not feasible, so you have to plan your "measurements" for each test case or even for individual test steps.
Even then, you might have to retry because this would be more recording capacity than your hardware has.
Last is that your test system itself might have an issue, like loose wires.
I can give you an example from automotive embedded projects. Assume you do a hardware-in-the-loop test of an electronic control unit and you assume you found an issue.
Now, theoretically, it is enough to show the expected and real result and reference the test case leading to it.
However, taking into account you had time- and value-continuous hardware signals, being processed by an software running on a hardware which is not synchronous to the test system and 6MB RAM for static variables in the electronic control unit, it requires often a lot of data to root-cause this.
Always recording everything is not feasible, so you have to plan your "measurements" for each test case or even for individual test steps.
Even then, you might have to retry because this would be more recording capacity than your hardware has.
Last is that your test system itself might have an issue, like loose wires.
answered May 20 at 8:05
Torsten KnodtTorsten Knodt
213
213
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Software Quality Assurance & Testing Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsqa.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39243%2fwhy-do-testers-need-root-cause-analysis%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
9
I guess the counter to that is "Why bother testing if you're not going to fix it? And how do you fix it without figuring out how it happened in the first place?"
– corsiKa♦
May 19 at 20:21
9
Why does anyone, in any industry, need to understand and solve the actual problem instead of just patching the symptom and hoping for the best?
– jonrsharpe
May 19 at 21:20
2
really? I don't believe you genuinely cannot fathom why it's a good idea to find out why something happened.
– Emobe
May 20 at 11:34
unboundedness vs boundedness are, analytically speaking,arbitrary.
– RIzaa
May 20 at 15:25