Are software testers responsible for continuous quality?

I’m still struggling with testing moving with this continuous quality phrase

It’s such an ambiguous term to me, “continuous quality” has a broad, fuzzy goal where as “continuous testing” is a concrete, technical practice.

Quality is just so broad a term to say someone is skilled in quality. OKRs for quality go way beyond testers

Testing is a skill, discipline, and role. Quality is an outcome really. So roles like “Quality Engineer” or “Head of Quality” feel conceptually flawed. “Continuous Quality” sounds like we are just rebranding existing CI/CD and testing practices with a new ambiguous word.

Would prefer a new term which made things clearer not more ambiguous.

Are we now continuously responsible for the quality of a product team, delivery team, compliance team, support teams , engineering team, operational team, legal team, leadership etc as Quality engineers. How do you get skilled at quality engineering? It loses its meaning if it means everything?

A lot of the CQ phrases sound like good engineering, observability, testing, and monitoring practices — not a distinct practice called “CQ”.

Are we creating roles with impossible scopes?

2 Likes