Software Testing vs Quality Assurence - what is in a name?

Currently at PA Media my job title is “Software Quality Assurence Engineer” AKA QA Engineer and I am part of the “QA Discipline”.

We soon going to be working on a Discipline vision statement, and it got me thinking, is QA even the right name for the discipline? I think no, but am I worrying too much about a word? Spesifically, the word “assurence”.

In Ten Misconceptions About Software Testing - That Non-Testers Share, point 10 is “Testing Is Quality Assurance”. And I agree with this.

So it got me thinking, should I be pushing to change my role, job description and descipline before we come up with a Vision?

I would really like to hear from other Testers who:

  • Feel their job title/department is named incorrectly
  • Are attached to the QA name, and have good reasons why I shouldn’t be looking to move away from it
  • Have ever been part of changing the Test Depart ment name to/from QA, what did it end up as?

I am also interested in the term “Quality Engineering”, but I haven’t been able to find an article that describes it that I really like yet.

If you have any books/articles/blogs that discuss QA Vs Testing or similar topics that you think are worth me reading, I would really appreciate you sending them along!

Also, I want to hear from you if you think I am barking up the wrong tree and that it doesn’t really matter QA Vs Testing, as long as the company is investing in Testers, who cares?

6 Likes

Job titles can end up being a warren of fail if you think about it too much. In my previous org I had tester and QA in the title at various points (always with analyst) which really didn’t help the situation as other parts had analyst in their title attached to the word consultant as well which means several different things to different people. In my experience outside of tech teams the difference between a QA/Tester, a Developer and a member of the support team is difficult to be retained. I know people have strong feeling towards not being called a “tester” and not liking to have “QA” in their title as it implies quality is their problem/remit.
My title in my new company is “Senior QA Engineer”. I was mostly drawn in by senior part which was a sore point from my last org. I’m not doing anything different really from my previous job there is just only me and org uses Engineer in their title and I quite like it.

I guess what would you like for your title?
I’m not sure there is a title that would instantly help anyone understand it and there are a bunch that cause instant confusion.

4 Likes

My first testing role was as part of a QA team, because the organisation’s emphasis was on data quality and integrity; and indeed, my first tasks on the team were to work with external consultants on data collection methodologies and to work with specialists on data definitions, before we even thought about having an application to do the data handling, let alone writing any code. It was possibly two years before there was any question of having an application that needed testing, and even then I would sometimes have to switch tasks to do some data validation for a report, press release or a high-level keynote speech, checking that the numbers in those things were a) accurately transcribed, b) the latest and best data that we had, and c) quoted consistently within the document (‘text to tables’, or do we use the same numbers in the body of the text as in the tables in the report).

So for me, software testing has always been a separate discipline within an overall QA strategy. QA goes much further than just testing; it’s about advocating for quality across the whole range of work and making everyone responsible for quality in their own area. Testing is a whole separate strand within that. Of course, organisations, their work and their objectives vary, but this approach taught me useful lessons for later.

3 Likes

This is a debate that will probably never get everyone on the same page.

In my opinion a role with Quality in the name probably better reflects what it is that I do, but I have given a wider berth to QA as a title, not least because assurance isn’t a helpful terminology and I think it carries more baggage than is useful.

However I have also been a Test Engineer before and that also didn’t really reflect what it is that I was doing, as I wasn’t only engineering tests.

I guess Software Quality Engineer sounds nice, but then don’t developers also aim to engineer quality software too?

I’m definitely talking myself out of this as we go.

In a different thread, I suggested rather tongue-in-cheek that we should be called Test Ninjas, but in my context I have been trying to frame the remit of those who do testing and quality roles primarily, that we would call it Quality Practice. It’s not perfect, but I think it speaks better into what we do.

5 Likes

I love test ninjas.
I quite like Testing Tsar

5 Likes

I once had the official title of automation tsar, it was a great honour, but as we know you, metaphorically speaking, you either die a hero or live long enough to be the villain.

5 Likes

I just got referred to as a “Guru” quite a lot which I hated with an intense passion. It just makes me think of the very bad late 90s/ early 00’s Mike Myers Film which I’ve still only seen the trailer for. Not a compliment Ack

2 Likes

Yeah, it’s tricky. In this context, there really isn’t an industry standard that I can get on board with, Guru, Ninja and Tsar just don’t sound professional enough, and it’s not like we don’t sometimes struggle enough for legitimacy within our own business. We just want something that covers what we do, but also fits with our characteristics and more.

3 Likes

As some mentioned, the title is really up to the org., so don’t worry too much about it!

In one of the orgs that I worked, they gave me a title ‘Test Technologist’, I really loved it, and am keeping it even now after I became independent.

Funny thing is right about the time I came out of that org, ,they changed their titles scheme, all technologists became ‘Test Engineers’ however senior they might be! Sad for them.

Do the Testing, and you’ll be alright!

4 Likes

Perhaps we could claim (and rehabilitate) the word “Technocrat”?

3 Likes

That sounds nice, I also enjoyed Ard Kramer’s ‘Qualisopher’

3 Likes

I personally loathe that testing is called “Quality Assurance”, it’s total bullshit. No one can assure quality.

But, on the other hand, after having fought many battles to get people to call it differently, I can give you one simple advice (from experience): People will not understand why the title is so important and in the end it might not be worth it to pour energy in.

An easy compromise that comes at least closer to the truth might be to keep the QA in the job title, but tell people it stands for Quality Assistance.

On a side note, I think it’s a bit childish to call yourself “test ninja” or something along that lines, but that depends on the org you work in, I guess.

4 Likes

I once thought QA sounded better if the A stood for Assessment. But that’s probably a bit limiting for some places.

I’d much prefer the QA role went away to be honest as it carries the stigma that quality is only the concern of the QA.

2 Likes

I’m really looking towards something more like “Quality Engineer”. I think test ninja is great for a community name, but not keen as an actual job title.

In my case, and this won’t be universal, the Testers in my org are all developing test code (automation, tools, supporting script’s). So we are all Engineers.

Both terms are associated with the qa testing services provided by a testing company. We can understand each term in the following way :

Quality Assurance (QA): It is a term that can be used in a broad way for any type of service. The main objective here is to prevent any error or mistake in the manufactured products and the final aim is to provide a quality product to customers.

QA teams in IT companies ensure that the product is according to the specifications provided to the developer team.

Software Testing: As the name suggests it involves testing the software by executing previously designed test cases, either manually or via automation.

Software testing teams can have their perspective regarding the app workflow and can also suggest improvements to the development team.

So in the end, when a company is looking for a tester, they are looking for the one who posses the qualities of both terms mentioned above. Hence as long as the company is investing in testers you can have any of these titles.

1 Like

I understand your concern and it is correct to some extent to believe that software testing is quality assurance. However, quality assurance is a much broader term compared to software testing. Software testing as it comes from the term is limited to software only, quality assurance on the other hand defines all the benchmarks of creating quality for applications as well as enterprise solutions.

Also, Software testing focuses on evaluating and verifying the functionality, performance, and reliability of a software system. On the other hand, Quality assurance encompasses a broader set of activities aimed at ensuring that the overall software development process meets quality standards. QA involves defining processes, standards, and guidelines, establishing metrics, and monitoring adherence to them throughout the software development lifecycle

To highlight a few differences, I would say:

  1. Software testing is typically performed during the later stages of the development process while quality assurance activities span the entire software development lifecycle.

  2. Software testing is often performed by dedicated testers or testing teams who specialize in executing test cases, analyzing results, and reporting defects. On the other hand, Quality assurance involves multiple stakeholders, including QA engineers, project managers, developers, and other team members

  3. The main objective of software testing is to identify defects or deviations from expected behavior in the software. Quality assurance, on the other hand, focuses on ensuring that the development process itself is of high quality.

Thus, I would say, rather than changing your designation, you must add software testing as a proficiency while showcasing it as a subset of your quality assurance engineer experience. And just in case you need to dive into more detail of quality engineering, I would recommend you go through the blog my team has curated. Let me know your thoughts later.

1 Like

Thank you for showing an interest in this thread, many things have happened since I wrote it.

A quick update, since posting this question a few years ago, I have moved to the role of Quality Engineer at Ada Health. And my involvement in many more aspects of quality in the SDLC has grown massively.

I’ve also worked hard to move away from being an “external tester”, to being even more integrated into the team, and supporting testing activities by the team in a much more collaborative way.

2 Likes

I think your post serves to show the vast differences in our namespaces. For me, I am a tester, I test throughout the life cycle, my testing involves all stakeholders and I say the main objective of software testing is to provide reliable information about the product and project to the right people so that they can make more informed descisions.

For me, I will pragmatically ignore any label other than tester. I am not in quality assurance nor am I only an engineer. I say that both of those terms are misleading and limiting and that tester is a wider and more rich name for what I do. I am a professional skeptic, skilled explorer, process improver, communicator and scientist. I am a tester.

Your definition of tester is therefore a world away from mine. If we are all using different terms, and I think this serves as evidence for that, then it is probably less useful in general to spend effort on global linguistic prescriptivism and more valuable to explore, deeply and in detail, what we mean by what we say and what implications that has for our work. Terms are important, and we can discuss the benefits of their accuracy and affordances, but to attempt to nail it down and declare it correct is unhelpful to that discourse. I think it is also important to take notice of the differences in names and definitions that we use, so that we can be more aware of linguistic traps in discussions and try to maintain an open mind and healthy respect for our fellow test-related comrades.

2 Likes

I have never liked being called QA because if I am testing something people say it is ‘in QA’. Does that mean it is not ‘in QA’ when I am not testing it?

2 Likes

I’ve gone back and forth with this, regarding my own professional identity. I typically rejected “QA” labels, but I quite like Quality Engineer. However, my external persona beyond my job, is always Tester, e.g Full Snack Tester. I’m not a Full Snack Quality Engineer, I’m a Tester.

What I have experienced, is that I try never to let the titles I have box me in, and I try and always do the good work there is to be done. However, the perception of others I work with is heavily biased towards the titles that are used, even if they are NOT the official job title.

I often correct people if they call me a QA, not least because at Ada Health, we have QA roles, they are genuinely doing different QA work that is not software testing. So we have to get this right, because some things for regulatory reasons need QA sign off, and that really isn’t me, this time! :slight_smile:

1 Like