But don't you think "Too may chefs spoils the Soup?".By giving numbers to all the people who involved in project will hammer the progress. It will be very hard to meet satisfy everyone's number with in the time constrain?
Hmmmm.....This seems a wee bit counter intuitive to me. What happens when people violently agree and something that becomes the hot topic absorbs the effort that is required to "round off" the product? Another issue would be the distraction involved in absolutely defining the argument for an issue to be tackled when several things work against the "real" issues. Seniority, power, personal preference, ability to craft an argument can all combine to distract. I cannot diagree completely with the proposal, but it leaves me feeling a little bit uneasy. At some point the decision maker has got to be the one to say, "Enough, this is the direction, this is the priority, now JFDI!" based on their assessment and vision. That is where the real strength of a Test Lead/Manager shows. Help people make informed decisions and don't let a feeding frenzy develop around the priority list.
Agreement is always work to forge but once you have it -- bang! that's a solid test plan (and a STRONG test lead/manager)... When the inevitable bug crops up in production (in an area which was de-prioritized), no one wastes time blaming QA, they just focus on the priorities. I think it's more work up front but pays dividends over time! Plus by getting agreement up front, you've already raised awareness of the most critical issues to the people who actually control quality.
The comments you read and contribute here belong only to the person who posted them. We reserve the right to remove off-topic comments.