Software Quality Assurance in Scenario of Project Management - Example

Project Management and Software Quality By Author Date Table of Contents INTRODUCTION Software quality testing is an analysis of software’s quality that is carried out in an attempt to decide if the quality of the software development is according to the requirements of the project sponsor, project stakeholders and several other authoritarian bodies. It as well facilitates in setting-up the software’s reliability and promotes a perceptive of the fundamental risks, if there is any when it is applied. In more simple words, software quality testing is a procedure of confirming that a software system or application is quality assured and performs all its functionality efficiently whilst offering the company requirements documentation approved before. Additionally, software quality testing could be performed at a variety of levels and several times all through the software development lifecycle process. Though, the most excellent time to perform it is following the software development requirements have been identified as well as on achievement of the coding procedure. On the other hand, the main reason of carrying out software quality testing is to identify and correct software breakdowns that might or else have gone unnoticed. In addition, the system testing is performed in dissimilar environments and by running using diverse scenarios with the objective to make sure that a system does what it is meant to perform at the best possible capability (My-Project-Management-Expert, 2009; Schulmeyer & Mcmanus, 1998). This literature review covers various aspects of software quality assurance in scenario of project management. In this scenario, this research will assess and analyze some of the important aspects of project management and their relation and possible influence on the software quality management. In addition, this research will assess the basic practice of software quality assurance and role of enhanced and effective project management at this paradigm. SOFTWARE QUALITY MANAGEMENT BASIC IDEA The delivery of quality software is going toward the new era. Though, for many years CIOs (chief information officers) have pointed to that one of their main precedence is lining up IT with business aims and objectives. In this scenario, the stress faced by the managers to renovate, grow and change with market requirements requires companies to put attention on this main concern. According to IBM software quality research and survey carried out in 2006, 65% of the global business chief executive officers (CEOs) stated that they develop policy and plan to fundamentally change their businesses in the next two years in reaction to forces from competitive as well as market services. So, nowadays IT imperative is to carry, as rapidly as probable and inside a fixed financial plan, quality business critical software and applications that are able to support and convey company ideas regarding tackling the novel challenges (IBM - Rational Software, 2011). In addition, there are three basic aspects to this challenge, which include quality, cost and time. According to this survey, approximately 80% of business’s IT budget is spent on overall processes. As a result, budget devoted to resources intended for software quality management is fixed, at top. On the other hand, with current day tooling and waterfall development procedures software quality necessitates extra time as compared to acceptable. In this scenario, to remain competitive, businesses require finding out useful ways which can help businesses improve and develop quality as shortening time to marketplace for business-critical software. Thus, it is essential that software quality management remains constant, directed and automated all through the software delivery lifecycle. In addition, the customary software quality assurance and testing just authenticates that the software in development follows end-user requirements for availability, functionality and performance previous to deployment. Moreover, if testing turns out to be the quality management purpose, IT will be unsuccessful to convene business needs (IBM - Rational Software, 2011; Pressman, 2001; Sommerville, 2004). SOFTWARE QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROCESS This section discusses software quality management’s basic processes and operations those are performed for the improved software quality management. Basically, the software quality management contains a set of procedures that make sure that the software project would arrive at its objectives. Alternatively the software project would convene the clients’ expectations. In this scenario, the important processes of software quality management are outlined below: (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Nandi, 2011) 1. Quality Planning 2. Quality Assurance 3. Quality Control This outlines that the software product completed should be according to business working and personnel needs described. The above mentioned parameters will be further explained below (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Nandi, 2011). 1) Quality Planning Quality planning is one of the most significant steps in software quality management. Since appropriate system planning makes sure that the outstanding quality procedures make sense and attain the preferred outcome. In this scenario, the initial point for planning procedure is the standards pursued by the company. This is articulated in the documentation and quality policy describing the organization-related working and operational standards. Occasionally extra business standards related to the software project can be stated at different phases of software development whenever they are required. Additionally, there are several inputs which are used to determined standards for the detailed project. The capacity of the effort is as well evidently defined. In this scenario, the inputs for the project planning are outlined below: (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Nandi, 2011) 1. Company’s Quality Policy 2. Organization Standards  3. Relevant Industry Standards  4. Regulations  5. Scope of Work  6. Project Requirements In addition, these inputs are used by the quality planning procedure to generate a plan to make sure that business standards decided upon are met. Therefore, the outputs of the quality planning development are: (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Nandi, 2011) a. Standards describing the Project  b. b. Software quality plan In order to generate above given outputs specifically the quality plan involves a variety of techniques and tools. These techniques and tools cover enormous topics and quality experts offer years of research on these subjects. These topics are stated below: (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Nandi, 2011) Benchmarking: The planned product standards could be determined by means of offered performance benchmarks of analogous products that previously exist in the marketplace. Design of Experiments: using product’s statistics we decide what issues influence the quality or characteristic of the end product. Cost of Quality: This comprises the entire costs enviable to attain the necessary quality levels. In addition, it comprises avoidance costs, assessment costs as well as failure costs. Other tools: There are a variety of other tools available for planning procedure like that System Flow Charts, Cause and Effect Diagrams, Cost Benefit Analysis, etc. All the above stated tools and techniques are aimed to facilitate software quality experts in developing the quality management plan for the software development project (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Nandi, 2011). 2) Quality Assurance The input to the quality assurance procedures is the quality plan developed all through planning process. In addition, quality audits along with a variety of other methods are utilized to assess the performance of the software development project. It makes sure that the project encompasses the quality management plan. Moreover, the tools and techniques utilized in planning process like that cause and effect diagrams and design of experiments can as well be utilized here, if necessary. 3) Quality Control This section discusses one of the most important processes of the software quality management that is quality control. In this process we carry out following quality control process: 1. Quality Management Plan  2. Quality Standards defined for the Project  3. Actual Observations and Measurements of the Work done or in Progress Moreover, the quality control procedures utilize a variety of tools to revise the software development work performed. Additionally, if the development task is performed is found unacceptable it can be sent back to the software development team for error correction and issues fixation. In addition, the modifications to the development practice can be performed if essential. However, if the task performed convenes the need and standards described then the work performed is established and released to the clients (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Nandi, 2011). THE TROUBLE WITH TRADITIONAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT EFFORTS There are wide-ranging outcomes between application developments groups that zero-defect software basically cannot be presented for a number of reasons. Initially, in this day’s on-demand world, each system has to develop along with the requirements of its client society that outlines constant changes. Next, only if software is built and designed by human beings it could be perfect, by definition. However, the expectations between executive management in the direction of software performance are radically dissimilar; software is predictable to carry out at described levels in an attempt to convene business aims and objectives. On the other hand, this disconnection between expectation and realism; of supporting the requirements of the company against the customary software application’s capability to convey; produces a “gray area” of discussion that forces businesses to reorganize who is eventually accountable for software lifecycle quality and how it should be dealt with (Borland Software Corporation, 2006; Schulmeyer & Mcmanus, 1998). Additionally, in this new age business world at the present ridden with risks and experiences at the corporate governance layer, it is just no longer sufficient for QA (or Quality Assurance) to be the individual party accountable for software quality. In addition, there must be a business assurance that works with executive management and expands its functions all through quality assurance, software development, information technology (IT) and lines of business groups. Normally, in software development, there are two risks or limitations of traditional quality management that influence a business’s capability to support business objectives (Borland Software Corporation, 2006; Schulmeyer & Mcmanus, 1998): 1- Lack of company alignment: Being associated with business objectives means being incorporated into the general business. In addition, the Silos project groups turn out to be islands of information and risk misplacing sight of their project’s true company value. 2- Lack of steady practices and procedures: Every project team or software development silo makes use of their own approach to quality, which results in slowly and disconnected performances that promote miscommunication all through the development attempt. Moreover, the quality attempts continue to nearly all labor-intensive, time-consuming and costly (as much as 60 percent of the whole expenditures of development) fraction of the software development cycle. Though, for the reason that of the high economic exposure less effective software quality performed through it, quality as well offers a chance to generate a massive return-on-investment (ROI) for a business, however, for this purpose it should be correctly managed. It is astonishing that the majority software development businesses do not have a standard procedure for managing, defining and reporting on quality tasks. Thus, with no pre-defined agreement, it is not possible to produce a standard analysis to determine quality, produce repeatable procedures and construct a continuing plan for permanent development. In fact, it is amazing that most of the software development firms yet outlook quality as a discrete and end phase to the development procedure. In this siloed atmosphere, quality assurance is sandwiched among development and application release, and typically not sufficient time is due to guarantee a high-quality system (Borland Software Corporation, 2006). THE COST OF POOR SOFTWARE QUALITY MANAGEMENT As software applications turn out to be more enveloping, the cost linked with quality-related maintenance increases exponentially. In this scenario, customary, siloed techniques of testing and approving software are no longer sufficient to up-hold currently existing business models. It is admitted fact that the software quality influences business in both quantifiable and immeasurable ways. According to a research report published in June 2002 by National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), faulty systems expenses the U.S. financial system a predictable $59.5 billion every year. In this scenario, NIST proposed that software testing developments could decrease this cost by a third, or $22.5 billion. Similar statistics were released in 2002 by National Research Council illustrated that U.S. businesses spent $175 billion in 2001 to fix damage caused by software faults. Since the increasing costs are surprising, the influence of less effective software quality management practices can bet a company plan for an individual business of immediately regardless of company size. In this scenario, some of the important issues and concerns regarding lower software quality are stated below: (Soni, 2010; MetricStream Inc., 2011; Borland Software Corporation, 2006; Seapine, 2011) Revenue loss, when software under-expectation or be unsuccessful to convene the requirements of its user society. Augment in support expenses, when systems are not dependable and user criticisms are bound for to a support business. Lost efficiency costs, when software below performs or be unsuccessful totally. Business brand damage, when the client community protests widely, or inferior, modifications in brands. Accountability costs, when software is unsuccessful to carry out as committed. BETTER SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT THROUGH EFFECTIVE QUALITY MANAGEMENT Meeting the requirements of software reliability, quality and safety is a vital element of any software development project. However, software development firms frequently address product quality very late, with disjoint procedures through insufficient cross-functional business communication. On the other hand, not including quality in an integrated method all through the software product development lifecycle is expensive to businesses, both in profitability and reputation (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Petrasch, 1999; SoftwareQualityAssuranceBlog, 2011; Green, 2000; PTC, 2011). In addition, in an “on-demand” market, time-to-market is vital, frequently forcing firmness in software release cycles. To be receptive, a lot of forward-thinking businesses are proactively tackling the risks linked with customary quality management working, balanced beside the rewards of establishing more planned methods to deal with software quality. In this scenario, one major instance of these methods is CoE (Center of Excellence) model that is turning out to be a method to raise standardized quality management as well as most excellent practices all through the business. Additionally, the Center of Excellence is a central business devoted to optimize software application quality, handle and unify toolsets, most excellent practices, knowledge, and offer leadership for quality processes (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Petrasch, 1999; SoftwareQualityAssuranceBlog, 2011; Green, 2000; PTC, 2011). Moreover, more and more corporations are effectively adopting agile/iterative software development procedures (where testing has to be included at every iteration all through the software development lifecycle) between a number of untimely adopters of additional leading-edge trenches to test business software development project management. Additionally, the market competitive pressures and the costs of post-deployment turn smarter quality management into a most excellent way to deal with risks and optimize software development quality. Though, except a well-organized quality communication is in place, testing can become a serious blockage to the general software development timeline (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Petrasch, 1999; SoftwareQualityAssuranceBlog, 2011; Green, 2000; PTC, 2011). Moreover, in spite of what software development or quality methodology is being used, if a business wants to gain useful return on investment, the end objective of some procedure has to be the optimization of software quality all through its development lifecycle. In this scenario, a major area of massive influence is quality management. It comprises the acceptance of more efficient decision support systems and tools to help users formulate trade-off decisions regarding business software system scope, quality status, schedule, resources and general management, comprising how decisions formulated in one practical area will influence the quality of another. As well, quality has to be assessed based on the group of formerly agreed-to metrics that are associated with the business objectives. Lastly, all the project stakeholders must be able to access the similar set of software quality metrics as well as quality-related details (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Petrasch, 1999; SoftwareQualityAssuranceBlog, 2011; Green, 2000; PTC, 2011). However, in an attempt to facilitate the company requirements of today’s business strategists, quality plans are most efficient when they happen all through the software application development lifecycle, in parallel with development attempts. In this regard, the major advantages to this technique are the leverage of intellectual resources and experience concerned in the application design implemented to quality strategy design (Exforsys Inc., 2008; Petrasch, 1999; SoftwareQualityAssuranceBlog, 2011; Green, 2000; PTC, 2011). SOFTWARE QUALITY LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENTS QLM (Quality Lifecycle Management), is a corporate-wide, cross-functional way for ensuring product reliability, performance and safety are associated with the needs and requirements placed for them over the way of a product’s life. In addition, the quality lifecycle management convenes the requirements for: (PTC, 2011) Quality planning: Describing functional requirements before time and establish a link between product requirements and characteristics Timely approaching into product reliability, quality and risk: Recognize how secure and reliable a product is all through the software design stage Cost planning: Keep away from cost of poor product quality, enhance business reputation, and save money through more dependable products Communication and recycle of lessons learned: makes sure corrective events are communicated to develop quality of software products as well as services In case of software development process quality lifecycle management is used to maintain quality, consistency and risk plan into the whole lifecycle. In addition, quality lifecycle management offers capability to support functional requirements of software product requirements. Additionally, the QLM also makes sure software development requirements followed the specific product characteristics. This also offers capability to track characteristics systematically all through the software development lifecycle. Moreover, the QLM offers capability of recognizing the quality related issues and initiate corrective actions. Here team members are able to communicate as well as reuse remedial actions to enhance software application (PTC, 2011). Furthermore, the QLM associations combine all of the reliability, quality and safety tasks that are established across each phase of the software product development lifecycle. In this process, one software development lifecycle phase notifies the next, and feedback collected from each phase is automatically provided to other applicable phases, formulating a combined, holistic model of general product quality. In this regard, with many reliability, quality and safety procedures combined into a single software platform, QLM facilitates: (PTC, 2011) An extremely structured way for automating the workflow of software quality information and responses among various product lifecycle phases Complete management visibility into overall scope of product safety as well as reliability at several software development lifecycle phases Cross-functional association across numerous divisions and teams responsible for software system safety, quality and reliability Functional links among various aspects such as product needs, characteristics and quality activities at every software development lifecycle stage A completely documented history of software system development from a quality viewpoint PROJECT MANAGER INTENTIONS FOR SOFTWARE QUALITY This section discusses about the main intentions of software project managers while implementing software quality management. Most of the people working in software development firms are familiar with that the project manager's force to formulate certainty the project is on time is at odds with the wish to have extensive quality software. Though, not that project managers do not desire extensive quality software, it is immediately they want the software and they wish for on-time development and costs that are at or fewer than what was predictable, and to quality. In addition, their attempts are frequently flourishing at minimizing cost as well as the development time devoid of impacting software system quality (Bogue, 2005; Borland Software Corporation, 2006). Below are some useful techniques and methods for quality management of business system. Though all of the following project management methods are as a minimum well meaning and in a number of scenarios, they are still time honored methods; they do have the potential for disaster. The below given methods and techniques can be used for the effective handling and management of the software process and development quality all through project management lifecycle (Bogue, 2005; Borland Software Corporation, 2006). Time boxing Getting top credits in the list of objects those are able to destroy software quality is known as the process of time-boxing. In addition, this performance is where we inform someone how long they are permitted to work on the job previous to it must be turned over (Bogue, 2005; Borland Software Corporation, 2006). Additionally, the time boxing forces the developer to be original in offering a solution that fits inside their budget. Thus, it gets rid of needless accompaniments that are frequently added to software that do not unavoidably add value (Bogue, 2005; Borland Software Corporation, 2006). False dates Everybody requires something to struggle for. In this regard, targets are an esteemed means to motivate people towards a united objective. Though, it is the responsibility of every team member to recognize the signs that would not always be convinced and then they must choose what to perform when that happens (Bogue, 2005; Borland Software Corporation, 2006). Pretending nothing is wrong When we talk about software project management, lack of knowledge is not bliss. In spite of frequently irresistible political force to have a flourishing project, it is essential to be forward in telling the risks of the project with the rest of business. In fact, almost each software development project encompasses issues and risks that make it probable that it will be late or excess of budget or both. In this scenario, people can make use of any open source code for the better software quality (Bogue, 2005; Borland Software Corporation, 2006). Ignoring dependencies In software development there are numerous methods for delaying dependencies. We are able to stub out processes, remove linking arrangements or avoid wide error handling. All of these methods when used properly are supportive to moving a software development project along. Though, when it turns out to be necessary to have the project completed as well as when the costs of these methods are not factored into the planning, problems sets in (Bogue, 2005; Borland Software Corporation, 2006). CONCLUSION Software quality testing is an analysis of software’s quality that is carried out in an attempt to decide if the quality of the software development is according to the requirements of the project sponsor, project stakeholders and several other authoritarian bodies. It is essential that software quality management remains constant, directed and automated all through the software delivery lifecycle. As software applications turn out to be more enveloping, the cost linked with quality-related maintenance increases exponentially. In this scenario, customary, siloed techniques of testing and approving software are no longer sufficient to up-hold currently existing business models. It is admitted fact that the software quality influences business in both quantifiable and immeasurable ways. Software quality assurance is one of the basic methods for ensuring software development quality. In this scenario resultant product comes with superior quality and enhanced functionality. These all aspects lead to better quality of software application. The project management of the whole activities of the software development is really necessary. In this scenario there is need for the effective application of the software quality management plan. This research has covered a detailed analysis of some of the important aspects of software quality and project management of overall quality management process. REFERENCES Bogue, R.L., 2005. The top 4 things project managers do to reduce software quality. [Online] Available at: http://www.techrepublic.com/article/the-top-4-things-project-managers-do-to-reduce-software-quality/5991800 [Accessed 27 September 2011]. Borland Software Corporation, 2006. Software Quality Management. [Online] Available at: http://www.borland.com/resources/en/pdf/white_papers/software_quality_management.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2011]. Exforsys Inc., 2008. Software Quality Management. [Online] Available at: http://www.exforsys.com/tutorials/testing/software-quality-management.html [Accessed 26 September 2011]. Green, B., 2000. Building Better Software. [Online] Available at: http://www.robelle.com/library/papers/better/ [Accessed 26 September 2011]. IBM - Rational Software, 2011. Software Quality Management from IBM. [Online] Available at: http://www.bizforum.org/whitepapers/ibm-8.htm [Accessed 19 September 2011]. MetricStream Inc., 2011. What is Your Company's Cost of Poor Quality (CoPQ) - Tools for calculating and reducing it. [Online] Available at: http://www.metricstream.com/insights/costofPoorQuality_home.htm [Accessed 26 September 2011]. My-Project-Management-Expert, 2009. Software Quality Testing. [Online] Available at: http://www.my-project-management-expert.com/software-quality-testing.html [Accessed 28 September 2011]. Nandi, S., 2011. Phases of Software Quality Management. [Online] Available at: http://www.softwaretestingclub.com/profiles/blogs/phases-of-software-quality [Accessed 19 September 2011]. Petrasch, R., 1999. The Definition of ‚Software Quality’: A Practical Approach. [Online] Available at: http://www.chillarege.com/fastabstracts/issre99/99124.pdf [Accessed 28 September 2011]. Pressman, R.S., 2001. Software Engineering: A Practicioner's Approach, 5th Edition. London: McGraw Hill. PTC, 2011. Quality Lifecycle Management. [Online] Available at: http://www.ptc.com/WCMS/files/118110/en/6530_Quality_Lifecycle_Management_TS_EN.pdf [Accessed 26 September 2011]. Schulmeyer, G.G. & Mcmanus, J.I., 1998. Handbook of Software Quality Assurance. 3rd ed. London: Prentice Hall PTR. Seapine, 2011. Identifying the Cost of Poor Quality. [Online] Available at: http://downloads.seapine.com/pub/papers/CostPoorQuality.pdf [Accessed 27 September 2011]. SoftwareQualityAssuranceBlog, 2011. What makes someone good at software quality testing – Good tester characteristics. [Online] Available at: http://softwarequalityassuranceblog.com/ [Accessed 29 September 2011]. Sommerville, I., 2004. Software Engineering, 7th Edition. New York: Pearson Education (Addison Wesley). Soni, A., 2010. The Organizational Impact of Poor Software Quality. [Online] Available at: http://saasinterrupted.com/2010/02/01/the-organizational-impact-of-poor-software-quality/ [Accessed 26 September 2011]. Read More