In the fast-evolving world of software development, it's easy to get caught up in numbers. At Curiosity Software, a company at the forefront of software quality, we've seen first-hand how metrics can both guide and mislead enterprise organisations into providing a false sense of effective quality.
Vanity metrics are those impressive looking numbers that lack real substance or actionable insights. They're the metrics that make us feel good, without necessarily contributing to our software's actual quality or our business's bottom line.
In the realm of software quality, I wanted to share some examples of vanity metrics which are commonplace in the software quality landscape.
Number of Automated Tests: Having many automated tests doesn't mean they're effective or cover the critical aspects of the software. “We have 5000 automated tests so we must be testing well!”
Test Cases Executed: Simply running a large number of test cases doesn't guarantee software quality if these tests aren't targeted or meaningful.
Code Commit Frequency: Regular commits can indicate activity, but not necessarily progress or quality.
Bug Counts: High numbers of identified bugs can be misleading; they might reflect poor quality initially or an overly aggressive bug-reporting process.
Code Coverage: High test coverage can create a false sense of security. It's more important to have meaningful tests that cover critical and complex parts of the system.
Number of QA Engineers on a Project: Simply having more QA engineers doesn't guarantee better software quality. The focus should be on their expertise, collaboration, and the efficiency of the testing process.
In the domain of software quality, true value is derived from metrics that profoundly influence user experience, product reliability, and stakeholder confidence. The DevOps Research and Assessment (DORA) framework provides a comprehensive guide for measuring DevOps performance, crucial for understanding and enhancing our software development processes.
Alongside DORA's insights, we prioritize several other metrics that offer actionable insights and reflect the authentic health of our software projects:
Requirement Coverage: This metric evaluates how effectively our testing efforts correspond with specified requirements. More than just fulfilling requirements, it's about ensuring each requirement is met with effective tests. This thorough alignment assures that our software is not only rigorously tested, but also crafted to meet the precise needs and expectations of our customers and stakeholders.
Defect Escape Rate: This indicates the number of issues that make it into production. A low defect escape rate signifies a strong testing and quality assurance process, implying that we are efficiently identifying and resolving problems before they affect our users. It serves as a clear indicator of the success of our pre-release testing strategies.
Mean Time to Resolution (MTTR): This measures the swiftness with which we address and resolve issues after their identification. A shorter MTTR denotes agility and prompt responsiveness in our software maintenance and support, underlining our commitment to rapidly resolving user issues and enhancing overall customer satisfaction.
Incorporating DORA's key metrics, we also focus on:
Deployment Frequency: The rate at which we successfully release to production, reflecting our team's ability to deliver value rapidly.
Lead Time for Changes: The duration from commit to production, indicating the efficiency of our development pipeline.
Change Failure Rate: The proportion of deployments that result in production failures, a critical measure of our release stability.
Time to Restore Service: How quickly we can recover from a production failure, demonstrating our resilience and operational capability.
Beyond these metrics, methodologies like Model-Based Testing (MBT) significantly augment our approach to software quality. MBT, which involves generating test cases based on abstract models of software behaviour or requirements, leads to more comprehensive and efficient testing. This method aligns seamlessly with agile development practices, offering a structured yet adaptable testing approach.
The shift towards meaningful metrics is transformative. It’s tempting, as a leader, to focus on numbers that look good in reports. But the real reward comes from seeing our software make a tangible difference in users’ lives. That’s a metric that’s not easily quantified, but it's felt deeply.
As we continue to navigate the complexities of software quality, let's remind ourselves: It's not the size of the data that matters, but the depth of the insights we glean from it, and ultimately improving software quality. Let's focus on metrics that matter, those that bring real value to our users and our business.
To learn how Curiosity can help you improve your software quality, talk to a Curiosity expert today!