ISTQB FOUNDATION 4.0 | Tutorial 25 | Early Feedback | Review Process | Roles & Responsibility | CTFL
Summary
TLDRThis tutorial on ISTQB Foundation level certification covers Chapter 3 on static testing, focusing on the review process and the importance of early and frequent stakeholder feedback. It explains the benefits of early feedback in identifying anomalies early in the software development lifecycle, thus saving time and costs. The video outlines the formal review process, detailing the phases like planning, review initiation, individual review, communication and analysis, and fixing and reporting. It also highlights the roles and responsibilities of participants, such as the manager, author, moderator, scribe, reviewers, and review leader, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the review process.
Takeaways
- 1. The video tutorial covers chapter 3 of the ISTQB Foundation Level Certification, focusing on static testing and the review process.
- 2. Early and frequent stakeholder feedback is crucial for identifying and correcting anomalies in the requirements phase, saving time and resources.
- 3. The review process helps in detecting potential quality problems early, ensuring the product meets stakeholder expectations and preventing costly rework.
- 4. Frequent stakeholder feedback throughout the SDLC can prevent misunderstandings about requirements and ensure changes are implemented correctly.
- 5. The review process involves several phases: planning, review initiation, individual review, communication and analysis, and fixing and reporting.
- 6. The planning phase involves defining the scope, objectives, types of documents, review type, time allocation, and selecting the right participants.
- 7. The review initiation phase, led by a moderator, ensures all participants are prepared, understand their roles, and have the necessary materials.
- 8. During the individual review phase, each reviewer independently assesses the work product and logs their findings, recommendations, and questions.
- 9. The communication and analysis phase, or review meeting, involves discussing and analyzing anomalies, deciding on their status, and determining required actions.
- 10. In the fixing and reporting phase, the author addresses the identified issues, and the moderator ensures all activities are completed and documented, meeting the exit criteria.
Q & A
What is the importance of early and frequent stakeholder feedback in the review process?
-Early and frequent stakeholder feedback helps identify anomalies and misunderstandings early in the process, saving time and cost. It ensures the product meets stakeholder expectations and prevents project failures.
What are the main phases of a formal review process?
-The main phases of a formal review process are planning, review initiation, individual review, communication and analysis, and fixing and reporting.
Who is responsible for defining the scope, objectives, and participants of a review during the planning phase?
-The manager is responsible for defining the scope, objectives, and participants of the review during the planning phase.
What is the role of the moderator in the review process?
-The moderator ensures the effective running of the review meeting, including mediation, time management, and maintaining a safe environment where everyone can speak freely.
What activities are involved in the review initiation phase?
-In the review initiation phase, the moderator ensures all participants have access to the work product, understand their roles and responsibilities, and are prepared to start the review.
What is the purpose of the individual review phase?
-The purpose of the individual review phase is for each reviewer to independently assess the work product, identify anomalies, and log their findings for discussion in the review meeting.
What happens during the communication and analysis phase?
-During the communication and analysis phase, reviewers present their findings, the author addresses questions, and anomalies are discussed to decide their status, ownership, and required actions.
What is the role of the scribe in the review process?
-The scribe is responsible for recording all details during the review meeting, including decisions and new anomalies found.
What is involved in the fixing and reporting phase?
-In the fixing and reporting phase, the author works on open defects, the moderator gathers metrics, and defect reports are created. The process concludes when the exit criteria are met.
Who can play the role of a reviewer in the review process?
-A reviewer can be anyone responsible for reviewing the work product, such as project team members, subject matter experts, or other stakeholders invited to review.
Outlines
🌟 Introduction to ISTQB Foundation Level Certification - Chapter 3 Overview
The video begins with a warm welcome and introduces the topic of ISTQB Foundation Level Certification, specifically focusing on Chapter 3 which deals with static testing. The segment to be discussed is 3.2, covering feedback and the review process, including benefits of early and frequent stakeholder feedback, the review process itself, and standard roles and responsibilities in reviews.
📋 Importance of Early and Frequent Stakeholder Feedback
This section emphasizes the significance of obtaining early and frequent feedback from stakeholders. It explains how early feedback helps identify anomalies in requirements sooner, thus saving time and effort. Frequent feedback ensures continuous improvement and alignment with stakeholder expectations, which is crucial for preventing misunderstandings and ensuring the product meets the desired quality standards.
🔄 The Formal Review Process: Phases and Roles
The formal review process involves several key phases: planning, review initiation, individual review, communication and analysis, and fixing and reporting. Each phase has specific activities and roles, such as the manager who defines the scope and objectives, the moderator who facilitates the process, and the reviewers who identify issues. The section details the responsibilities of each role and the importance of conducting reviews systematically to ensure thorough quality assessment.
📑 Detailed Phases and Roles in the Review Process
This paragraph further elaborates on the individual roles and responsibilities in the review process, such as the scribe who records details, and the reviewers who assess the work product. It discusses the importance of the review leader in organizing and overseeing the review logistics. The conclusion highlights that these structured roles and phases help maintain the effectiveness and thoroughness of the review process, contributing to the overall quality of the product.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Static Testing
💡Early and Frequent Feedback
💡Review Process
💡Stakeholder Involvement
💡Formal Review
💡Moderator
💡Scribe
💡Anomalies
💡Review Techniques
💡Agile Methodology
Highlights
Early and frequent feedback allows for the early communication of potential quality problems.
Failure to deliver what the stakeholder wants can result in costly rework, missed deadlines, and even complete project failure.
Frequent stakeholder feedback throughout the SDLC can prevent misunderstandings about requirements and ensure changes are implemented earlier.
Early feedback helps the development team improve their understanding of what they are building and focus on features that deliver the most value.
Prioritization during backlog refinement helps identify risk areas much earlier in the lifecycle.
Formal review process includes phases like planning, review initiation, individual review, communication and analysis, and fixing and reporting.
The planning phase involves defining the scope, objectives, type of document, review type, and selecting the right set of participants.
Review initiation, or kickoff, ensures that every participant is prepared, has access to the work product, and understands their roles and responsibilities.
Individual review phase involves participants reviewing the documentation independently to identify anomalies and recommendations.
Communication and analysis phase, also known as the review meeting, involves discussing and analyzing identified anomalies.
Fixing and reporting phase involves the author working on open defects and reporting back to the concerned reviewers.
The manager is responsible for deciding what is to be reviewed and providing resources such as staff time for the review.
The author, who has written the document under review, is responsible for fixing identified issues.
The moderator ensures the effective running of the review meeting, including mediation, time management, and maintaining a safe review environment.
The scribe records all details during the review meeting, including decisions and new anomalies found.
Reviewers are responsible for performing the review and may be project team members, subject matter experts, or other stakeholders.
The review leader takes overall responsibility for the review, organizing when and where it will take place, and ensuring all logistical aspects are covered.
Transcripts
Hello friends and greetings for the day
welcome back to another tutorial on
istqb Foundation level certification we
are in chapter 3 talking about static
testing and moving on to our next
segment which is 3.2 feedback and the
review process and as a part of this
segment we have many other segments and
today we'll be talking about
3.2.1 benefits of early and frequent
stakeholder feedback
3.2.2 the review process itself that is
what are the activities and in that
Activity 3 2.3 that what are the
standard roles and responsibility in the
reviews of these stakeholders so let's
quickly have a look on what exactly the
review process is all about and why
should be conducted how should be
conducted and how does it make a
difference to the overall
process to kick off the discussion of
course uh the very first thing we
talking about early and frequent
feedback from different stakeholders and
certainly the early and frequent
feedback is coming back from aile
methodology and being Blended together
as a part of our general process as well
early and frequent feedback certainly
talks about that we are trying to test
all the artifacts all the V products as
in when they are created say for example
if I'm trying to write a requirement and
then there was no discussion done on
that people just interpreted whatever
they wanted to understand and they
established the design based on the
design people started writing the code
and then we come to the testing and have
a different perception we raised a
concern okay not a defect but just a
concern that okay I don't think this is
what we are asking for or this is not
what the expectation is just having a
contradiction you know just ignited a
discussion and based on that discussion
we realized that there was an anomaly in
the requirement but the time consumed
here to go back to the requirement phase
and identify that the requirement had
anomaly took longer than if we could
have joined hands together right at the
requirement phase in order to understand
the requirement had anomaly right and
that's where we say early and frequent
that means early that means as early as
the document is being written you start
reviewing them and identify the
anomalies in it and second important
thing is frequently that means it's not
a one-time activity as in when you get a
moment you quickly do a informal or some
kind of casual review but do it in order
to just find those missing dots which
could create a big problem problem
tomorrow right and that's what we have
been doing in agile also if I talk about
agile every single Sprint we sit down
and do a discussion on each and every
story before we take it take up them
into the Sprints and at the end of the
Sprint also we demonstrate it to the
customer in order to get a confirmation
from them so in that context let's have
a look what exactly the benefits of
these two things could be when it comes
to our review process number one early
and frequent feedback allows for the
early communication of potential quality
Prof problems if there is little
stakeholder involvement during the sdlc
the product being developed might not
meet the stakeholders original or
current versions indeed that's one of
the key point that at the end of the day
all you're trying to make is a product
which meets the customer desired
expectations but if in case we miss out
something that would be a useless
product to the business altogether also
to add here a failure to deliver what
the stakeholder wants can result in
costly rork missed deadlines blames uh
blame games and might even lead to
complete project failure no doubt at all
certainly if you do not meet the desired
expectations of a customer or business
it certainly returns a negative feedback
indeed a complete failure of the project
as well as the product will be rejected
by the customer stating that this is not
our expectation right also to add here
the frequent stakeholder feedback
throughout the sdlc can prevent
misunderstandings about requirements and
ensure that changes to requirements are
understood and implemented earlier now
right here one thing we told you what is
the benefit of early and now frequent is
consistent so that we keep getting them
as in when it happens plus when we talk
about this helps the development team to
improve their understanding of what they
are building it also allows them to
focus on those features that deliver the
most value to the stakeholder and that
the that have the most positive impact
on identifying risk so prioritization is
being discussed here of course when we
talk about today uh working on backlog
refinement we always try to prioritize
those work items which helps us to
identify the risk areas much earlier in
the life cycle and at the same time it
we also look forward to what is most
important for the business to see first
and we try to work on those elements
first those functions first first and
then deliver them so that they can also
visualize and look forward to any
further requirements whatsoever they
have in order to blend them with the
existing other features so put together
the benefits of having early and
frequent feedback certainly saves a lot
of our time indeed in other terms it
saves a lot of Cost Plus builds a better
understanding of what you are making and
at the end gives you a successful
product so most important topic of the
day is review process or this particular
tutorial mainly is to talk about what is
a formal review process all about and
what exactly it takes to conduct the
review process very very formally what
are the different phases what are the
different standard roles and
responsibility however we can do them in
different ways and we call them as
different review types which we'll be
talking on our next tutorial but here we
are talking about how formally a review
process can be conducted so what are
those major activities let's quickly
have a look so first of all the review
process is very uh different kind of
them right we we do get different types
but here what we talking about is a very
formal review process which includes
phases like planning review initiation
individual review communication and
Analysis fixing and Reporting so on a
very nutshell way we do have different
activities taking place here and
different standard roles and
responsibility which we'll be telling
you in the next slide so let's get
started and I'll blend the
responsibilities and role right here so
to kick off of course the very first
thing we're talking about is the
planning phase the planning phase of
course uh here the manager is a standard
role which gets involved depending on
the type of work product the manager may
be different for example if you're
talking about requirement review then
the project manager will take the
ownership of the manager if I'm talking
about a test plan review or test case
review then the test manager can also
take the ownership of manager so during
the planning phase of course uh the
scope of review which comprises the
purpose the work product to be reviewed
quality characters to to be evaluated
areas to focus on exit criteria entry
criteria sporting information such as
standards effort and time frame for the
review shall be defined so manager is
someone here at this point of time
responsible to Define all these activity
that is the scope the objective the type
of document which type of review to be
conducted how much time will be allocate
in order to perform that and who all
will be responsible to participate here
because we just don't can't invite
everyone because it's just generic no
not at all we need someone who is really
experienced in conducting reviews and
participating and contributing in that
so selecting the right set of people is
also equally responsible when it comes
to the planning all right moving on to
the next one of course we have the next
phase as review initiation which in
other words is called as kickoff that
means the start of the event here
basically the moderator takes over the
responsibility moderator is someone who
is well trained on review process you do
not get a designation in the company as
moderator but someone in your
organization maybe your project manager
or technical lead or any senior engineer
who is well trained on that can play the
role of moderator so moderator B
basically during the review initiation
the goal is to make sure that everyone
and everything involved is prepared to
start the review this includes making
sure that every participant has access
to the work product under review and
understands their roles and
responsibility and receives everything
needed to perform the review process
that means we just want to make sure
that everything is in place and we are
good to go and get started so
Distributing the documentation
explaining them the objective of what is
the review all about and answering any
questions whatsoever they may have could
also be a part of the review initiation
let's look at the third one and here we
have individual review now the
participants means the reviewers whom
you have shortlisted will be starting
the review process here we will go
through the documentation individually
to find out their potential list of
questions doubts and clarification so
every reviewer performs an individual
review to assess the quality of the work
product under review and to identify
anomalies recommendations and questions
by applying one or more review
techniques which we will be talking
about like checklist based review or
scenario based reviewing Etc now the
standard what we follow for this process
is ISO IEC 20246 standard it provides
more depth on different review
techniques so if you're interested you
can certainly look forward to gain more
understanding about that but for the
examination point of view you don't have
to get into the standard discussion okay
it's just for reference also to add the
reviewer logs all their identifying
anomalies recommendations and questions
so that it can be documented and brought
to the people's discussion so in simple
words this is an individual review where
they find all their queries uh whatever
they think they have uh independently
and bring this to the team when the
review happens also uh when the next
phase comes that is communication and
Analysis this phase is also referred to
as review meeting which is inviting
everyone all the standard roles and
responsibilities to be a part of this
meeting and every single reviewer starts
presenting their list of findings where
author someone who has written the
document which is under review should be
responsible ble to address these
questions and respond to them if in case
any questions remains open we will
document it and that's where the Scribe
as a standard role will be someone who
will be responsible to document it so we
will be documenting every single point
stated by each and every reviewer and
take that into consideration even after
the review meeting gets over the author
will continue working or reworking on
the open items and respond respectively
back to each of the reviewer who you
know reported that that particular issue
so in simple words when it comes to
communication and Analysis since the
anomalies identified during the review
are not necessarily defects all these
anomalies need to be analyzed and
discussed for every anomaly the
discussion uh decision should be made on
its status ownership and required action
this is typically done in a review
meeting during which the participants
also decide that the quality of level of
reviewed work product is and what follow
up actions are required a follow-up
review may be required to complete the
action so that's not mandatory enough
but if you think there are critical
items which you will you know open
during the review meeting then certainly
a follow-up review meeting may be
required to discuss that and then close
it last but not the least of course when
it comes to the next phase which is
fixing and Reporting as I already told
you fixing is all about author starts
working on all the open defects which we
could not resolve during the review
meeting then and there and then
reporting them back to uh the concerned
reviewer who identified it also the
moderator will gather all the matrices
to make sure that it is uh successful or
all the activities of the review has
been completed and then meeting the exit
criteria we close the review process so
plus to add here for every defect a
defect report should be created so that
the corrective actions can be followed
app once the exit criteria are reached
the work product can be accepted the
review results are reporter so again
when it comes to formal review process a
lot of things have to be taken into
account like making sure that every
single documentation takes place and uh
a formal entry and exit criteria should
be taken into account to make sure that
it meets the desired you know guidelines
and deadlines so in the continuation to
our previous discussion of course we are
giving you a separate page to talk about
the standard rules and responsibilities
of a review process so let's quickly
have a look on them the reason is
because we have already discussed what
they will be doing throughout the
process and where who is responsible but
however giving them a oneline definition
is not a harm so let's have a quickly
look that what are these standard roles
and how exactly their responsibilities
are defined the very first role here is
of course manager but reviews basically
involves various stakeholders who may
take on several roles the principle
roles and the responsibilities include
the number one is manager the person who
decides what what is to be reviewed and
provides resources such as staff time
for the review Etc so manager is someone
who plans did you know defines the cost
time budget Etc and also someone who is
responsible to monitor control and take
decisions about the review at any point
of time the second important role here
is author of course author is someone
who has written the document which is
under review and will be responsible for
fixing any kind of issues identified uh
during the work product RW
the third thing is moderator the third
standard role is moderator who is also
known as facilitator as a synonym this
person ensures the effective running of
the review meeting including mediation
that means being a mediator between
different points of uh discussion or
topic and the time management making
sure that we are just not uh extending
the given timeline and a safe review
environment in which everyone can speak
freely that means also moderating in
terms of that everyone gets a chance to
talk and respecting their inputs so put
together this is one man army who is
responsible to make sure that review
goes successful if anything goes wrong
certainly things may not be up to the
mark and moderator should be held
responsible for that the third important
role here is the scribe a scribe is
someone who is responsible to record all
the details during the review meeting
again you don't hire a scribe in your
organization so you may not find someone
dedicated called a scribe so anyone in
the team like a junior test engineer or
senior engineer can be responsible to
play the role of scribe during the
review meeting so here of course is also
called as recorder uh someone who is
responsible to collate all the anomalies
from the reviewers and
Records review information such as
decisions and new anomalies found during
the review meeting so this is only in
review meeting and not afterwards or
before that okay so the next one is of
course the reviewers so reviewer again
anyone who is responsible to review the
work product will be referred to as
reviewer they are responsible to perform
the review a reviewer may be someone
working on the project a subject matter
expert or any other stakeholder who is
invited to review the work product now
remember that people certainly have
different roles like tester designer
developer and so on but when they are in
review they will only be referred to as
reviewers okay not anything other than
that and the last but not the least of
course we do have someone called as
review leader also uh someone who takes
the overall responsibility for the
review such as deciding who will be
involved and organizing when and where
the review will takes place so this
person is more on the logistic SES
taking sure making sure that how the
review will take place when and where it
will happen whether do we have enough
infrastructure to do that because
sometimes the number of reviewers could
be high and uh we just want to make sure
that everything is made available to
them to conduct this event without any
kind of you know disturbance or any kind
of U deviations so put together these
are all the standard roles what we have
in a formal review process however when
we talk about different types of review
then we certainly have different things
to take into account and they might be
lightweight in terms of being conducted
so that's all from this particular
tutorial team should you have anything
else feel free to comment below I'm
always there to address your queries and
answer them well till then keep learning
keep exploring keep understanding the
cont
thanks for watching the video team and
happy
[Music]
learning
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
ISTQB FOUNDATION 4.0 | Tutorial 26 | Review Types | Informal, Walkthrough, Technical & Inspection
CH03. L02. Review Process
ISTQB FOUNDATION 4.0 | Tutorial 27 | Success Factors for Review | ISTQB Foundation Tutorials
ISTQB FOUNDATION 4.0 | Tutorial 3 | 1.2 Why Testing is Necessary | ISTQB Tutorials | TM SQUARE
No One Writes Alone: Peer Review in the Classroom - A Guide For Students
ISTQB FOUNDATION 4.0 | Tutorial 57 | Tool Support for Testing | Test Tools | ISTQB Tutorials
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)