home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26 / NN_1992_26.iso / spool / comp / software / 4269 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1992-11-14  |  1.2 KB  |  27 lines
  1. Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
  2. Path: sparky!uunet!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!firth
  3. From: firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth)
  4. Subject: Re: Who tests?
  5. Message-ID: <1992Nov13.151900.7090@sei.cmu.edu>
  6. Organization: Software Engineering Institute
  7. References: <1992Nov3.155609.9248@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> <1992Nov4.132732.27072@sei.cmu.edu> <1992Nov12.192215.18133@iqsc.COM>
  8. Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:19:00 GMT
  9. Lines: 16
  10.  
  11. In article <1992Nov12.192215.18133@iqsc.COM> rex@iqsc.COM (Rex Black) writes:
  12.  
  13. >However, I believe it would be very foolish for any 
  14. >company to scrap its testing efforts entirely immediately upon starting
  15. >at TQM program.  TQM is a long term investment, while testing is a risk-
  16. >reduction effort.
  17.  
  18. I agree with you completely.  One of the many lessons TQM teaches is
  19. that you do not divert resources and effort from the existing process.
  20. You also make incremental changes, and require every change to prove
  21. its effectiveness.
  22.  
  23. However, investment in defect prevention should, over time, reduce
  24. the need for testing.  And, to repeat a point, you'll never know
  25. when it is finally safe to do that unless you measure both process
  26. and product with insight and accuracy.
  27.