Browse Prior Art Database

Method or Process to Identify Quality Defects to Improve Product Quality.

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000199915D
Publication Date: 2010-Sep-21
Document File: 9 page(s) / 217K

Publishing Venue

The IP.com Prior Art Database

Abstract

The intent of this invention is to make sure developers utilize their quality of time on working quality defects and avoid working on invalid defects which in turn improves product quality. Some of the testers doesn’t want to take risk on quality of product, so they always try to raise a defect with lack of product design knowledge which yields to some of the invalid defects. Some of the testers doesn’t want to take a chance of raising invalid defects, hence they hesitate in raising the defects as they lack of product design knowledge which may turn as field defects in future. In general testers will raise defects either with confidence or with the doubt in product design. Most of the time testers doesn’t know complete and correct product design and which makes testers to raise invalid defects. Developers usually start working on opened defects and he/she has to spend lot of his quality time unnecessarily on working invalid defects which has been raised with lack of product design knowledge. Finally those defects will be returned with remarks as “as designed”, with this developer looses lot of his time to work on quality of defects. There is no solution/process exist to address this issue.

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 63% of the total text.

Page 1 of 9

Method or Process to Identify Quality Defects to Improve Product Quality .

The invention will work by having a drop down box with label called "Suspect" in defect template of CMVC or Rational Clear Case.

The drop down box should show Yes/

No options with default option selected as "No".

If the tester chooses Suspect=Yes, then the defect will be opened with status "Suspect" otherwise will be opened with default status as "Open".

1

Page 2 of 9

Defect Closed or R

e

-O

p

ened

START

Suspects Defect ?

Defect Statu

s

Is Developer free to

handle ?

= Returned

Defect Status ?

Defect Closed

Tester Finds

Defec

t

Defect Status =Suspect

Does Tester Analyzes defect within time frame ?

Defect Status =Open

Developer Works on Defect

2

Page 3 of 9

Defect Closed or R

e

-O

p

ene

d

STAR

T

Defect Statu

s

Is Developer free to

handle ?

= Returned

Defect Status?

Defect Closed

Tester Finds

Defec

t

Suspects Defect ?

Defect Status =Suspect

Does Tester Analyzes defect within time frame ?

Defect Status =Open

Developer Works on Defect

3

Page 4 of 9

Defect Closed or Re-O

p

ened

START

Defect Status = Returned

Is Developer free to

Tester Finds

Defec

handle ?

t

Suspects Defect ?

Defect Status =Suspect

Does Tester Analyzes defect within time frame ?

Defect Status =Open

Developer Works on Defect

Defect Status ?

Defect Closed

4

Page 5 of 9

Defect Closed or Re

-O

p

ened

START

Defect Status = Returned

Is Developer free to

Tester Finds

Defec

handle ?

t

Suspects Defect ?

Defect Status =Suspect

Does Tester Analyzes defect within time frame ?

Defect Status =Open

Developer Works on Defect

Defect Status ?

Defect Closed

5

Page 6 of 9

Defect Closed or Re-O

p

ened

START

Suspec...