Create knowledge
[?]
|
(rate this)
|
Managing people is tough probably beause there is no science behind it. The same stimulus can yeld amazingly different responses from different individuals even sometimes from the same individual. There are too many variables to take into account - the personal value system, the society, the culture, personal circumstances, family issues, feelings etc.. So it is nearly impossible to predict how someone will behave given a particualr event. Yet we have to get work done, we have to plan and this involves prediction of desired behaviour. And somehow there seems to be a framework on which we can base people management -Â I have dug through my experience and that of some of my esteemed friends a...
 |
Radhakrishna Marar
| Commented
| 3 years ago
|
|
Hi Abhijit, Thanks for this rules.... Rightly said the same kind of stimulus may or may not work depending upon the circumstances. I believe in today's world, where talent is hard to find or very costly to bring in and retain, leaders and managers...
|
|
Insight: "10 Rules of People management" deleted from your view.
|
(rate this)
|
|
Validations performed in GL System
|
1
|
VS |
0
|
Validations performed by the Payment Engine
|
|
|
Abhijit Dixit
| Argues in support of
"Validations performed in GL System"
| 3 years ago
|
|
As the GL is the true source for the account and the balance information. The validations should be performed there.
|
|
Debate: "Payment Validations" deleted from your view.
|
(rate this)
|
|
Manual Testing more beneficial
|
42
|
VS |
20
|
Automated Testing more beneficial
|
 |
Aniket Kumar
| Argues in support of
"Automated Testing more beneficial"
| 1 year ago
|
|
as far as possible testing large scale products manually will kill a lot of time. and in the mean while we have to do all our work in time so trying automated testing will save time , cost and also increase production . but still technology has...
|
|
|
|
Abhijit Dixit
| Argues in support of
| 3 years ago
|
|
Automated testing is ultimatley writing code to verify code. As such the basic act of verification will be based on human intillegence. So Manual verification is the basis or core of testing.
|
|
 |
Diptanjan Mukherjee
| Argues in support of
"Manual Testing more beneficial"
| 3 years ago
|
|
Both are important in it's own place. Before any automated testing one round of manual testing is recomemded to filter out the basic bugs. More over Manual Testing is followed in more places in this industry.
|
|
Debate: "Manual Testing vs Automated Testing" deleted from your view.
|
(rate this)
|
Hi, I am working as a BA. I would like to know the role of business analyst in Sarbanes-Oxley Act. How do i ensure that my software application is meeting this act?. What is the procedure?. I would re...
|
|
Abhijit Dixit
| Answered
| 3 years ago
|
|
SOX - testing is very different from normal application testing. Here you have to wade through log files to check that the necessary controls necessary for SOX compliance are in place. It is more of an auditors job. My experience with SOX testing...
|
|
Answer: "Role of BA in Sarbanes-Oxley Act" deleted from your view.
|
(rate this)
|
|
Yes
|
2
|
VS |
1
|
No
|
|
|
Abhijit Dixit
| Argues in support of
"No"
| 3 years ago
|
|
Unit testing will always be necessary, infact the Quality assurance phillosophy is to breen in quality as early as possible into the process leaving very little verification to be done prior to production. So the developers need to have the...
|
|
 |
Kiran Kumar Reddy
| Argues in support of
"Yes"
| 3 years ago
|
|
I feel unit testing have reached its high-water mark and is entering a period of stagnation or even decline. Only very large enterprises could afford it. The problem with unit testing is that it increases the cost of development before you know...
|
|
Debate: "Is unit testing doomed ?" deleted from your view.
|
(rate this)
|
Test Automation - everyone wants to use it but not many are ready to pay for it. Rarely does automation result in cost savings in the short term and as such most efforts for test automation are percieved as failures. As such it is really important to have a proper framework for assessing the feasibility of test automation for a particular project. A couple of points I like to consider in the automation fesaibility are  1. Longetivity of the application : Test automation would only be benefitial in applications which are there for the long haul i.e have a shelf life of atleast 3 years plus. 2. Stability : There are some applications which do have a long term life but are subject to major int...
 |
Darpan Sinha
| Commented
| 3 years ago
|
|
True I will say if you expect a lot of CR's to come your way automated testing can be boon as it will help you identify the impact of the change on other modules
|
|
|
|
karthik
| Commented
| 3 years ago
|
|
I feel whatever abhijit has said is correct but coming to the % of Test cases to be automated is entirely Dependant on the repetitiveness with consistency of a particular test...thats where automation is required in simple terms.... tools know...
|
|
Insight: "Test Automation" deleted from your view.
|
(rate this)
|
The main purpose of this question is to understand whether their perception is correct or not? Because When a QA/Tester can do automation work and test as well. Ther is no big deal about writing code...
|
|
Diptanjan Mukherjee
| Answered
| 3 years ago
|
|
Everything is easy when it's done by others !! Most of the developers dont have a good knowledge of Testing, they do not know how testing can be done perfectly and what are ther rules / principle followed while testing. Most of the developers...
|
|
|
|
Abhijit Dixit
| Answered
| 3 years ago
|
|
Well I thnik that developers believe that they have put in their 100% effort in the code and hence nothing can go wrong. As such they think testing is lack of trust in their abilities. They thus put down testing as job which is secondary. Having said...
|
|
 |
Dipankar Ghosal
| Answered
| 3 years ago
|
|
Well this topic has been there since i entered into this fascinating industry. Hope that this was even present earlier. It is evident that nobody likes his or her ability to be questioned .Applies to developers as well as testers. Developers find...
|
|
Answer: "Why do Developers think that Testing is not a big deal? How many of you think that its correct?" deleted from your view.
|
(rate this)
|
ACHÂ - stands for Automated clearing house. These payments are typically low value high volume payments. Where one account gets debited and multiple accounts get credited or vice versa. An example would be payroll payments or collections for phone bills , credit card bills etc.. Each country has a central body which acts as the clearing house for such payments. In the US it is NACHA , in Europe it is SEPA. Most such bodies are centrall owned by the government and represent the central bank in that entity. What I have seen in Latin America is that instead of the central bank owning the ACH - there is consortium of leading banks which owns the ACH. It makes for an interesting situation as most...
Trends: "ACH Payments in Latin America" deleted from your view.
|
(rate this)
|
|
Should be much lower than 25%
|
6
|
VS |
18
|
should be 25% of higher
|
 |
Santosh A. Jadhav
| Argues in support of
"should be 25% of higher"
| 1 year ago
|
|
It is always better to be on safer side ... so i think for any new product the cost should be more than 25%...
|
|
|
|
Abhijit Dixit
| Argues in support of
| 3 years ago
|
|
I think it should be lower that 25% of development effort. If you look at the manufacturing industry the effort invested in Quality is not in Quality Control (which is testing in IT) but on Quality Assurance (which should be integrated with dev.)
|
|
|
|
RASHMI BHARDWAJ
| Argues in support of
"should be 25% of higher"
| 3 years ago
|
|
i think the total effort should be halved between the development and testing team beacuse after the first initial release to testing team there can be bugs that arise and time is need to fix as well as test.
|
|
Debate: "How much % of development effort should be invested in testing ?" deleted from your view.
|
(rate this)
|
|
Should be much lower than 25%
|
6
|
VS |
18
|
should be 25% of higher
|
|
|
Santosh A. Jadhav
| Argues in support of
"should be 25% of higher"
| 1 year ago
|
|
It is always better to be on safer side ... so i think for any new product the cost should be more than 25%...
|
|
|
|
Abhijit Dixit
| Argues in support of
| 3 years ago
|
|
I think it should be lower that 25% of development effort. If you look at the manufacturing industry the effort invested in Quality is not in Quality Control (which is testing in IT) but on Quality Assurance (which should be integrated with dev.)
|
|
|
|
RASHMI BHARDWAJ
| Argues in support of
"should be 25% of higher"
| 3 years ago
|
|
i think the total effort should be halved between the development and testing team beacuse after the first initial release to testing team there can be bugs that arise and time is need to fix as well as test.
|
|
Debate: "How much % of development effort should be invested in testing ?" deleted from your view.
Follow me on
