long RE: Diff Betw. QA and Usability Testing

[Alexia Prendergast <alexiap -at- SEAGATESOFTWARE -dot- COM>]

In response to questions re: QA/Usability testing and the role of the
tech writer. (Disclaimer: I'm speaking from my experience -- YMMV.)

I would say that tech writers can be *very* useful to QA/Dev, but we do
not take the place of QA engineers.

We (the writers) use the software and are likely to come across bugs as
we use and document the software. It would be irresponsible not to
report found bugs or log enhancements. (IMHO, writers, along with
everyone else who is involved with the app, *are* responsible for the
general success of the product and are therefore responsible for
reporting any problems they find and for suggesting ways to make the
product more usable.)

QA, on the other hand, has specific processes that they use to actively
find bugs. They use automated scripts/tools and test plans and are very
methodical in their search. They do many kinds of tests including stress
tests, integration tests, tests of the help and documentation, etc.

Aside: Sometimes, we participate in "bug hunts" organized by tech
support and QA. Bug hunts are 2-3 day periods during which volunteers
from tech support, development, etc., pitch in and help QA test the heck
out of a release. QA/tech support generally distribute test plans for
volunteers to use. The test plans are based on experience level so
newbies can test the easy stuff and more sophisticated users can get
into the guts of the application. It's not an entirely altruistic
gesture on our part -- testing the docs/help is part of the test plan.

QA and usability testing are different (although QA certainly logs
usability problems/enhancements). QA testing comes towards the middle to
end of the development cycle and finds bugs in the software that are
then fixed or patched. Usability testing comes early enough in the cycle
that development can redesign the interface/app if necessary. The
prototype of a new application is a good subject for a usability test.
An existing application at the beginning of the next release cycle is
another good subject.

(Jane Bergen and Carol Van Natta just summarized the differences between
QA and usability testing nicely.)

Here, being a "user advocate" is part of our official job description.
(But it doesn't have to be official to assume that role!) We are
involved with development from the start of the design process.
Developers regularly ask our opinions about screens, error messages,
etc. We were recently asked to design some wizards to help our users
through some complex tasks. And so on. We affect the design, but we
don't have a full-blown usability testing process in place yet.

I think it's a smart business decision to move writers from a passive
position (accepting the software as it is and resigning oneself to
documenting it that way) to an active one (challenging the design and
suggesting improvements). That depends on the culture and management
support to some degree, but I've found it depends mostly on the writers
themselves.

Besides, being active is a darn sight more interesting and less
frustrating. :-)

A.
--
Alexia Prendergast
Tech Pubs Manager
Seagate Software (Durham, NC, USA)
mailto:alexiap -at- seagatesoftware -dot- com