A recent study affirms that businesses lose $2.41 trillion due to system downtime, decreased productivity, and customer churn. By skipping QA for any software development, all of these variables are methodologically encouraged. Not only that, but skipping QA can have far-reaching consequences, ranging from revenue loss to reputation and customer confidence erosion.

There are companies all over the globe that determine it’s easier to integrate QA into their existing team or completely avoid having a QA team and/or QA processes at all. For example, Startups almost never have QA teams or procedures in place at first because “everyone can test” and it’s “just an extra expense.” I’ve seen hundred-person companies with no QA staff or presence in the QA process.

I’ve enumerated the most common reasons (read: excuses) why businesses and teams choose to forego a dedicated QA team and process… as well as the dangers that come with it.

1. The dev team will do the QA/testing

2. Anyone can do QA/testing

3. Client is responsible for testing and will validate in UAT

4. We don’t need QA

1. Immediate Cost of Skipping QA

Putting buggy software into production is akin to jumping out of an airplane without first verifying your parachute. You might survive, but the possibilities of something going wrong are high, and the consequences can be disastrous.

Fixing bugs in production can be a costly and infuriating experience, especially if it necessitates emergency hotfixes and outages. This can result in decreased productivity, strained customer relationships, and substantial revenue loss.

These dangers are not just theoretical. Windows ME is the benchmark for buggy and poorly tested software. This buggy software caused the windows operating system to frequently generate errors of Blue Screen of Death. This not only wasted the time and money invested in developing Windows ME but also badly knocked down the reputation of the company.

2. Long-term Cost of Skipping QA

When buggy software is publicly released after production, customers are frequently the primary victims. They may run into bugs or errors that prohibit them from using the software as meant, resulting in frustration and lost sales. In some cases, customers may opt to discontinue using a company’s product or service entirely, resulting in customer churn.

Negative reviews can also be a costly consequence of releasing untested software. A study reports, 88% of consumers trust online reviews as much as personal recommendations, where a single negative review can cost 30 potential consumers!

3. Opportunity Costs of Skipping QA

We know the tough competition given by Apple to Microsoft. The latter released Windows Vista, which was plagued with bugs and performance issues. Because the bug-free release was delayed by several years, the company lost market share to competitors as a result. Apple seized this opportunity and released its own operating system, OS X, which was seen as a more stable and reliable alternative to Windows.

It was also seen with Niantic’s highly anticipated game Pokemon Go, which had a slew of bugs and server crashes when it first debuted. This led in negative feedback and a drop in player interest. As a result, the company lost potential income and the chance to establish itself as a leader in the mobile gaming industry.

Read the complete post here:

To Conclude

There are many factors to consider when weighing the importance of QA in the software development process, ranging from the risk and repercussions of publishing untested or badly tested software to the long-term costs of lost customer confidence and negative reviews. Businesses should prioritise investing in effective quality analysis to ensure a high-quality product that meets customer expectations, reduces the risk of bugs and security vulnerabilities, and provides a competitive advantage in the market.

Are you willing to uphold an effective quality analysis of your software? Connect with the QA experts at Ace Infoway today!