I came across an interesting software testing outsourcing technique here based on pay per bug approach. This testing consultancy is offering testing services and clients will be charged on the basis of number of bugs found in the application.Why outsourcing?
Many companies are outsourcing software testing work to concentrate on their core business competencies. The company will save time and money on testing processes that is tedious to perform in house.
Current offshore teams are working on per project deal means cost of software testing is decided according to the:
- Project size
- Time for testing
- Number of resources
- or Deliverables.
What if offshore teams start charging the clients on the basis of number of bugs?
Many companies don’t want to pay for documentation, as they might not require it in future. So such clients are more interested in getting the testing work done in less cost and within their budget. Pay per bug approach can work greatly for small projects where requirements are straightforward and clear. In this approach client have freedom to select the testing area as only UI or only Functional or only Security testing as per their requirements.
Will Pay per bug outsourcing technique work?
But I see many complexities in this model. It might not work for all kinds of projects. What if the tester is working to find only smaller and easy to find bugs to increase the bug count and not concentrating on the complex modules? One solution for this could be - Charge the client depending on fixed price per bug or can you can vary this amount according to the bug complexity and the type of testing.
Another problem with this module is - How to decide the severity of the bug? Tester will log bugs with high severity if they are earning high rate on the basis of bug complexity. Client will try to reduce the bug severity as to reduce the testing cost. It’s also difficult to decide whether it is a bug or not Or it is a feature itself? And what about the rejected or ‘won’t fix’ type bugs?
Worst case is if you are getting paid on the basis of number of bugs and you spent enough time to find the bugs, but if application is robust enough that you end up with very few or no bugs then how would you cover the testing recourses cost in this case?
There are lots many such areas of controversies but the concept is good and can be a good outsourcing solution if handled effectively.
I am interested to know what our readers think about this pay per bug approach. Is it a good model or service to outsource the testing services on pay per bug basis?
20 comments ↓
i think it is not a good idea.it may works when requirements are very clear but most of the cases it is not possible …
consider this case…
tester found a bug and as for the requirements it is not a bug.will it be reported or not
thats good !!
ALSO…can anybody help me in finding a good class for automation tools.in mumbai?
Great Topic….
As the outsoursing testing is done every where so somewhat this concept will work fine. It will increase the productivity of a tester and will help to make the project more robust.
Definitely Its not a good Idea as sometime we have to spend lot of time to create Test environment and all these necessary things and even after sometimes we couldn’t sure about bug… And sometimes Its totally opposite of… So There should not be any relation between bug count and money……..
As you stated earlier it will be a worst case if testing team does not find any bug or found very few bugs. It will be difficult to maintain the balance in this case. Some times testing team will get benefit or some times clients. But there should be some fixed approach like current pay system according to project size or team size.
This approach is only possible if the testing consultancy is having good experience of this charging system. Somewhere you need to mixup both the charging systems to get some third good corner.
That’s what I think.
Hi,
can any one tell me about qtp faqs website
I do not think this is a good idea, it may be beneficial for the client but on the other end for the outsourcing company, it may affect them financially if the project they took has less bugs. Their investment will be at stake and their staffs may also get affected.
I definitely would not agree with this model. Coming from a background where it is possible that you pickup the testing from a blackbox perspective it could happen that there are a large number of defects. In this case it would be fine.
On the whole you do run the risk of good unit testing resulting a very minimal amount of defects and should you have a large team / project then you will ultimately end up working at a loss…
I will not agree to this because Imagine a Scenario (if its a Product based) where there is change in requirement Specification,then the build version keeps changing then there will be lot of new bugs introduced i dont think any company is wise enough to spend money for this kind of bugs.
Also For outsourcing company got to give a clear SRS and i doubt if there exist a clear one.
Check out: www.utest.com - they say they are going to offer testing services based on bugs found.
Yes, Price for bugs should be depend on the Quality of the Bugs. Rate for Functional bugs should be greater than GUI and spell mistake.
Sure its increase the productivity
I have been toying with this idea for a long time now, yet I have not been able to reach a conclusion. Most of the websites in India are awful to navigate. They are not at all user friendly and they hardly ever fulfill an end user’s requirements. Yet, due to various constraints, most of the owners of these websites would seldom entertain the idea of test/re-testing them properly before release.
So I thought of a strategy to first find a bug in their websites and then approach them with estimated and potential losses that they are liable to face, if the bug is not fixed. In my career as a consultant, I have realised that you can get a person buy your idea only if there is some tangible benefit for him in the deal.
Once the client is convinced, it gets easier to sell the idea of testing the entire site on “charge the clients on the basis of number of bugs”. The approach at this stage should be exactly like any other marketing effort (complete proposal).
But there are some risks involved in such a proposal and I have not been able to get a solution for the following:
1. How to establish control over the dev activities of the client?
2. How do I monitor honest conformance of the client to the established understanding of the proposal
3. What would be the baseline for rate fixation?
4. How could the quality of a bug be translated to a rating scale or a common factor (like $’s or Rs), which could be easier to comprehend for the client.
I am still working on it and hopefully have the issues resolved in future.
Meanwhile, I find the concept very interesting and worth developing.
[…] Should companies charge the clients on the basis of number of bugs? […]
Hi the topic is very interesting ,for this i have a question ? 1.When there is no bugs then we will not get the amount or else 2.minimum testing charges should be done apart from that charge based on the no. of bugs can be included , I think the second one can work effectively…
Regards,
Revanth
Re:latest comment from Revanth, take a look at my earlier comments. The idea of first finding a flaw in an application and then approaching the client is two-fold. It helps to ascertain the revenue generating potential of taking on an application and testing it on a “Pay as you find ” basis. Moreover it helps to approach and convince the potential client with more confidence and credibility
[…] days ago I have written a post on Pay per bug approach to charge clients on the basis of number of bugs. There are some distinct obstacles in […]
[…] thiyagarajan in Testing News. Tags: Testing News trackback Some days ago I have written a post on Pay per bug approach to charge clients on the basis of number of bugs. There are some distinct obstacles in […]
Hi,
This is a nice idea, and more over the product owner will get benefit definetly, coz no of testers with different midn set will test the application. And it is good for testers also, coz they can test the product with open minded.
But if a tester needs to put more amount of time to find a bug and if it not much importanat then it is wasting of time also.
Finally i can conclude that there are pros and cons in this
Yes i think its good idea but in this matter there should be more clarifications need like whether requirement will be provided before testing, how much payment will get by the tester etc…..
This is a nice idea, both the product owner and Testing Team will get benefit. For this minium charge should be done apart from that charge based on the no.of Bugs can be included.But Testing should be in time frame.It is good for testers,because they can test the product with open minded. That’s what i think.
Leave a Comment