Automation is rapidly changing every industry it touches—especially the software and IT sector. By implementing automation, QA teams can increase their throughput by huge factors, save time, cut costs, and improve the overall quality of the product they ship. With all of these benefits, who would avoid switching over to automation?
Any time a feature is added or improved, an application’s code is in danger. There’s no escaping it, unfortunately: Any time a developer touches an existing piece of code, s/he introduces the possibility of breakage and new defects. This is especially true, and most common, in the areas where new code meets old.
The world of data security is changing rapidly - so rapidly that it can be hard to keep track of all the authentication methods that see wide usage and adoption from product companies. Currently, there are three main categories for security solutions. First, what we know: Your standard alphanumeric passwords and security questions. Second, what we carry: Hand-held items like key cards and ID badges. And third, what we are: Unique bodily identifiers that are nearly impossible to replicate.
We’re all familiar with choosing super-strong passwords and clipping an ID badge on our belt loop before leaving the house. But in general, biometric authentication is still a relatively new category in the security space.
Ideally, your collaboration product delivers efficiency, productivity, and flexibility to its users. By integrating relevant third-party applications, such as single sign-on capability, social media sharing features, customer relationship management, and document editors, you can add considerable value to your product and greatly improve the user’s experience. Thorough QA services ensure that your integrations work as expected and do not affect the existing functionalities of your product.
Remember the days when storing sensitive data behind a simple alphanumeric password worked just fine? Those were the days... such simple, innocent days. Every time the latest company data breach makes the news, we’re reminded that those days are over. As hackers and leakers become ever more skilled and brazen, product companies are responding by doubling down on security measures to protect their users, proprietary information, and their reputation in the market.
Today, access control goes far beyond the keyboard. The advent of biometrics - the process of authenticating a person using physical or behavioral characteristics - is expanding the reach of security and increasing its effectiveness.
For many product companies, QA remains a grey area. Maybe there are a few QA engineers onsite, thinly spread over a bunch of different projects. Maybe the developers double up and test as they code. Maybe they use a nearshore vendor that eats up the testing budget, or an offshore provider delivers a bug-ridden product. What is the solution for a company looking to strike a balance between quality, cost and great client experience?
Back in the day, outsourcing was implemented purely as a cost-cutting measure. Organizations would assess which services were vital enough to be kept in-house, and farm out the rest to outside vendors. The work got done, but often, it just wasn’t up to par with what an onsite team could have accomplished. Reasons for this varied -- poor onboarding, insufficient communication, lack of familiarity with the product -- the list goes on.
For young product companies struggling to find their place in the market, there’s no slack. No margin for error, no wiggle room, and no second chances from customers or investors. This means that everyone and their competitors are striving for perfection, and lean teams are trying to run like those twice their size. It’s hard, but it’s the cost of innovating and succeeding.
There are still companies out there that dismiss offshore QA as a steep investment — not necessarily in terms of money, but in time. They figure that finding the right QA partner, onboarding them, transferring knowledge, and coordinating schedules will simply take too much time, and that they’re better off hiring in-house or having developers handle the QA workload.
While it’s true that outsourcing your testing services comes with some initial time investment and a certain degree of change management, the benefits — huge time savings, exponential increases in productivity, and a higher-quality product — make it worth while.
Ask just about any authority in the software testing space if you should outsource your QA testing, and you’ll get the same answer: “It depends.” It’s true - we’ve said essentially the same thing ourselves.
But the truth is, outsourced QA is almost always a better choice than investing in building out a team. Simply put, when all variables are considered, it’s just a better way to work.