I suspect clientco's supplier is outsourcing

[Mich the Tester]

Why do I suspect them?

Well, since I've been on this project I was generally impressed with the quality of the software coming my way for system tests. The software was being made by highly experienced developers in Holland and you could see that. Testing was a challenge. Trouble is, the last two releases have been rather less than brilliant. The last release showed a marked increase in bugs, including bugs that had been introduced to previously tested and accepted functionality, while that functionality wasn´t even changed. Now I´ve just started on another release. The first critical finding came within 3 minutes of starting my testing and prevents me testing a big chunk of functionality. The second major bug has just been reported by McColleague, 6 minutes later. Also, the general look and feel and the performance has become less consistent. I know that Clientco have been pushing to reduce costs; are the suppliers perhaps doing a 'plenty cheapness in Bangalore' job?

[RichardCranium]

You could put on your Professional Consultant hat and write a report for ClientCo giving your professional opinion that something has changed for the worst, quantify it and state why you think it is A Bad Thing.

It'll might make you feel better even if it changes nothing.

But it will be easier for them to terminate the outsourcing early rather than late, but to do so will require evidence.

[Mich the Tester]

You could put on your Professional Consultant hat and write a report for ClientCo giving your professional opinion that something has changed for the worst, quantify it and state why you think it is A Bad Thing.

It'll might make you feel better even if it changes nothing.

But it will be easier for them to terminate the outsourcing early rather than late, but to do so will require evidence.

Indeed. I had already reported a drop off in quality during the last release, but I also said that this might be a one-off and you can't extrapolate from statistics on one release. Now however, it's two releases plus two bug fixes that have gone wrong. Time to write report.

[jmo21]

You could well be correct, but what may also have happened is they could have rewritten part of the innards of the software which would explain why sections that have no new features are affected.

it could also be that there are other, lesser dev's have been moved onto the project as it has progressed (but not offshore).

Whatever's happened, it shouldn't make a difference to your report.

[pzz76077]

Why do I suspect them?

Well, since I've been on this project I was generally impressed with the quality of the software coming my way for system tests. The software was being made by highly experienced developers in Holland and you could see that. Testing was a challenge. Trouble is, the last two releases have been rather less than brilliant. The last release showed a marked increase in bugs, including bugs that had been introduced to previously tested and accepted functionality, while that functionality wasn´t even changed. Now I´ve just started on another release. The first critical finding came within 3 minutes of starting my testing and prevents me testing a big chunk of functionality. The second major bug has just been reported by McColleague, 6 minutes later. Also, the general look and feel and the performance has become less consistent. I know that Clientco have been pushing to reduce costs; are the suppliers perhaps doing a 'plenty cheapness in Bangalore' job?

Why not simply reject the current consignment as not fit for purpose??

PZZ

[EternalOptimist]

If the look and feel have changed, that does sound like a different developer(s)
Different standards at least. Ask why the standards have changed