What does quality mean to your stakeholders?

A really interesting conversation popped up on Slack last week talking about quality and the perceived presence or lack of quality in products. This spun off a really interesting thread asking:

what does quality mean to your stakeholders?

From bugs to cool features to usability, quality can mean different things to different people and sometimes it can be difficult to articulate what it means or find out what others think it means.

Do you know what quality means to your stakeholders? If not, do you know how you would approach finding out?

in my current office, quality is about having automation scripts instead of manual. also, the impression is more automation is better.
It would be better to have goals ie defect containment in requirements phase, dev phase, testing phase e.t.c. because it gets more costly as the defect is found later phases in the project. Perhaps 0 critical defects leaked into the next phase

1 Like

I hate to have to admit it, but in our company the definition of quality is TBD. This is because, alas, we have not got a clear document on same, not much beyond some soundbytes like ‘quality is paramount’. The reality is the pressure to deliver for customers means that quality is paramount, but delivery is, erm, paramount-er. :smiley:

This leaves me as a tester maybe a slightly uncomfortable position as I haven’t, for example, got a quality policy to use when making a case for fixing a defect. It also means that quality, rather like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Having a quality policy is something I think it may be useful to have so will follow the thread with interest to see what others think, especially those with policies to see ow they help testers in their jobs…