Quality Assurance in Product Development Projects

"Last week, one client raved about how we nailed the work. This week, another one is wondering if we only staffed interns on the project." Quality whiplash isn’t about talent, it’s a systems failure. Tell-tale signs of inconsistent quality in agencies: - Design comps shift style by project lead; code quality swings sprint to sprint - BD sells timelines that most of the team feels is impossible - Freelancers drop in mid-flight with zero onboarding, zero artifact standards - No agency-wide QA checklist, so “done” means something different on every Slack thread - QA feedback go five rounds deep, eroding client trust (and margin) We've faced our fair share of quality challenges across our Barrel Holdings agencies, and here's a systems-based way to experiment & address them: Map the breakdown: - SOPs live in personal Docs; no shared QA gates - Onboarding varies; freelancers learn standards on the job - Dashboards track velocity but no discussion/visibility on quality - BD scoping best-case velocity, ignoring realistic buffers Re-ground the team in core principles: - Reliability is client value, make it non-negotiable - Shared craft standards beat lone-wolf heroics - Definition of "done" must be simple, visible, and shared - Every defect = data for the playbook, not ammo for blame Close the operational gaps: - Agency-wide QA checklists for design, code, content (stage-gated) - Central component libraries + design tokens to reduce variance - Onboarding session dedicated to "quality/QC" for all hires and vetted freelancers - Proposals embed QA buffers; BD gets input from dept. leads on quality feasibility/trade-offs as part of the scoping process Reinforce with structure, rhythm, and feedback: - Appoint a Quality Lead per practice who can be owner of SOPs and audits - Weekly cross-team QA huddle; monthly touch-base to share wins/misses - Real-time dashboard surfaces defects, rework hours, SLA breaches - Internally celebrate first-pass approval, scrutinize late-night patch fixes (why did it happen?) Watch the ripple effects: - Scoping process may lengthen sales cycles, equip BD team with effective ways to frame the QA process/why it's important - Short-term margin dips from extra QA, but rework write-offs disappear - Celebrate process adherence as loudly as creative flair to cement culture shift Success looks like: - >90 % first-pass QA approval within two quarters - Rework hours down 40 % and reduction in feedback rounds per project - BD proposals include QA buffers 100 % of the time, no scope write-offs - Client scores on “quality & consistency” hit 9/10 and stay there Avoid relying on senior leads or "A-Team" to bail you out when quality falls short. Instead, build a system that delivers predictable excellence, letting BD sell with confidence and ops scale without surprises. == 🟢 Find this helpful? Subscribe to AgencyHabits for weekly systems insights. The full Agency Systems Playbook drops soon—subscribers get first dibs.

One of the most impactful changes I've seen in quality happens when you implement one specific process: a 30-minute QA-Dev sync meeting for each feature before coding begins to discuss the implementation and testing strategy. When I first bring this up with a client, I get predictable objections: Developers don’t want to "waste" their time. Leadership doesn’t want to "lose" development time. Testing is necessary anyway, so why discuss it? Our QA doesn’t couldn't possibly understand code. The reality is that the impact of effective testing can be remarkably hard for an organization to see. When it goes smoothly, nothing happens — no fires to put out, no production issues. As a result, meetings like this can be difficult for leadership to measure or justify with a clear metric. What confuses me personally is why most engineering leaders say they understand the testing pyramid, yet they often break it in two, essentially creating two separate pyramids. Instead, you should have a collaborative session where QA and Dev discuss the entire testing pyramid — from unit tests to integration and end-to-end tests — to ensure comprehensive and efficient coverage. Talking through what constitutes effective unit and integration tests dramatically affects manual and end-to-end testing. Additionally, I'm continually impressed by how a QA who doesn’t "understand" full-stack development can still call out issues like missing validations, test cases, and edge cases in a method. QA/Devs should also evaluate whether any refactoring is needed, identify potential impacts on existing functionality, and clarify ambiguous requirements early. The outcome is a clear test plan, agreement on automated and manual checks, and a shared understanding that reduces late-stage bugs and improves overall product quality. #quality #testing #software

Is your fast moving product team struggling with compliance for medical device development? Maybe the problem isn’t with the team but with your design control procedures. Modern development methods involve frequent iterations of hardware and software. If your company’s design control procedures assume a once-through, linear approach (with no unknowns) then your quality system is likely undermining product teams instead of supporting them. Here are three recommendations for improving quality system support for design iterations during development (without compromising compliance): 1 - Staged change control: don’t use a one-size-fits-all change management process; instead make the change controls appropriate to the stage of development: use a lightweight process for early in development then increase controls as the project progresses, eventually to full production controls at the time of launch 2 - Emergent requirements: don’t mandate completed product requirements at the beginning of development; instead allow the initial release of a product requirements document to include multiple TBDs that identify uncertainties and gaps which the product team will then resolve during development as they gain more knowledge from prototyping and testing 3 - ALM system: implement an Application Lifecycle Management system (software tool) for managing risk, requirements, design, and test data and traceability amongst these elements; an ALM system provides a single source of truth for key design control content throughout development and can keep up with frequent product design iterations (the DHF documents are then generated automatically out of the ALM system database) Do you have other tips for supporting fast moving medical device product teams?

How to not be the next Theranos in 5 easy steps (explained in a way that even a Silicon Valley VC can understand) 1. Start with a Quality System “What do you mean, bro, of course we’re quality.” No, a quality system, or the framework for how the organization builds products, tracks and maintains quality, mitigates risk and remains compliant with federal law. There are a few standards here, but the one most applicable to medical device manufacturers (yes, lab tests are devices) is FDA 21 CFR 820/ISO 13485. This is something that EVERYONE in the lab industry needs to get familiar with very soon whether they want to or not. VC: A quality system gets you to an exit. 2. Think through and document Design Controls “Bruv, we’re a nimble organization that rapidly iterates to create the products people want tomorrow, but we do it today!” Cool story. You’re going to want documentation for that. The key word here is traceability, or, how have decisions been vetted, verified and validated during the product development process. Terms you’re going to want to remember are: Design input - The specs, user needs, and intended use Design output - Drawings, plans, risk assessments, results, etc Design review - Process of reviewing all of the steps in the product design process Design verification - Does the product satisfy the design input specs? Design validation - Does the product meet the user needs and intended use? Design transfer - Release of product to production Design changes - Changes during and after the development process must be documented, verified, and validated VC: Design controls get you to an exit. 3. Militantly update the Design History File or DHF “That has the word Design in it, broseph, we already talked about Design Controls.” Yes, but this one is super extra important because it’s the file that keeps track of all of the documents created during the design process AND all of the new stuff that’s created through change management. This is basically the ‘Old Testament’ of a Quality System Bible. VC: A Design History File gets you to an exit. 4. Manage all the risks, all the time “The only risk we need to manage is whether we hit our growth target, Bro-tholomew.” The not so funny thing about developing products in healthcare is that when you screw up, you kill people. Risk management in the context of a quality system ensures that a product is safe and doesn’t result in death. Risks can present themselves at multiple levels from the product itself, to the components, to the suppliers who provide the raw materials. VC: Risk management gets you to an exit. 5. Don’t ‘fake it til you make it’ or ‘move fast and break things.’ “But, Bro-tosaurus Rex, that’s like, both of our mottos!” I get it. But healthcare isn’t software development. Faking and breaking here generally result in dead people. VC: Verify the founders know WTF they’re doing, to get you to an exit. --- Want this content in your inbox? Visit my website ⬆️

𝐐𝐀 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐦𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬: Should every bug be fixed the moment it appears? 🤔 I used to believe that delaying even one issue could harm your software until I learned this… “Don’t fix bugs later; fix them now” – Steve Maguire. That idea pushed me to act fast on every issue. But over time, I saw that rushing to fix every defect only added to the stress and made the backlog grow. Instead, I learned to sort through the bugs, much like a doctor prioritizes treatment for the most serious symptoms. This is called “Defect Triage”. Defect triaging means reviewing reported bugs, setting their severity, and deciding which issues need immediate attention. It involves checking for duplicate reports, assigning the right priorities, and making sure your team focuses on the most important problems first. When we use this process, we free up time to focus on what truly matters. Fixing the most critical defects first not only keeps your software stable but also improves the user experience. It saves your team from spending extra effort on minor issues that don’t have a big impact, and it helps prevent your defect list from becoming overwhelming. Regular triage meetings, where testers, developers, and product managers come together, strengthen communication, and create a clear plan of action are helpful. This collaboration makes sure everyone understands which issues need immediate work and which can wait, ultimately leading to better decisions and a smoother workflow. Develop your defect management process to keep your projects efficient and your team focused on what really matters. When we work together to triage defects, we build a steady process that results in a more stable, user-friendly product. 🚀 #DefectTriage #QualityAssurance #SoftwareTesting

Building a Quality-First Culture: The Key to Success As the Head of QA, one of my core beliefs is that quality is not a department - it’s a culture. To truly deliver outstanding products, quality needs to be embedded into every part of the software development process, and that starts with building a quality-first culture. Here are a few ways we nurture this mindset across our teams: Collaborative Approach: Quality isn’t just the responsibility of the QA team. Developers, product managers, designers, and even marketing all play a role in ensuring that the product meets user expectations. We work together, share insights early, and create a shared understanding of what “quality” truly means. Early Involvement: We integrate QA from the beginning of every project - starting with design and requirements. By involving QA early on, we catch potential issues before they escalate, reducing the time and cost associated with late-stage fixes. Continuous Feedback Loop: Quality is a journey, not a destination. We continuously review and improve our processes based on feedback, test results, and user input. In agile environments, this iterative feedback helps ensure we’re always improving. Empowering Teams with the Right Tools: Giving our teams the right tools for test automation, performance testing, and CI/CD pipelines ensures that quality is maintained at scale. It’s not about finding defects at the end - it’s about preventing them from happening in the first place. Ownership and Accountability: Everyone is empowered to own quality. We encourage team members to take pride in the quality of the product, not just the code they write. This mindset leads to more collaboration, better solutions, and a stronger product overall. A quality-first culture doesn't just result in better products - it builds trust with customers, enhances user satisfaction, and drives long-term business success. It takes time to foster, but when it’s in place, it’s a game-changer. How are you fostering a quality-first culture in your team or organization? #QA #QualityFirst #SoftwareDevelopment #Leadership #QualityCulture #ProductExcellence #Collaboration #TestAutomation #Agile