There was an interesting discussion in LinkedIn about why companies reduce/fire/not hire testers. There were different reasons that were expressed. I went through all the messages in the comments, and it appeared to me finally that there could be only one reason why such companies don’t have (sufficient) testers. Let’s talk about perceived value of testers in this blog.
Companies that give (part of) their basic services free of cost do not have a business or revenue case to have testers, as per their perceived value of fixing the defects found. Most of the defects found are not ‘catastrophic’ or a blockage that would prevent millions of users worldwide from using a functionality. If such severe bugs were found, the users all over the world would be screaming in social media, and obviously, the companies would quickly look at them and get them fixed as soon as possible. If the bugs are not such severe ones, the bugs go into a ‘normal’ severity database, and developers will look at them as and when they find time. Since these services are not paid for by the users, there is no priority associated with it. And since there is no priority associated with it, for them, in their opinion, there is no need for testing teams. It could happen in any B2C company that provides free services.
There is no really a right or wrong answer here as to how the companies should handle the testing of their services. It entirely depends on the leadership of that company and what value systems they have towards perceived quality by the users. To me, I would still internally test all the features well, because I see these features (free or not) as stepping stones towards the perceived brand value. As a customer, every usage and interaction that I have with a product creates an impression on me about the product. If I am going to buy a paid service from a product, these impressions are going to make an impact on whether I purchase or not.
What can you, as a tester, be careful about in these situations? Well, do your research well as to whether the organisation really values testing, and places emphasis on fixing bugs even for their free services. If you see that testing or the quality of the product is not valued, stay away from joining the company.
As an user, what would I do when I need to decide if I should use a product/service? I would check if defects are very few in the product when it reaches you, and if defects are found and reported, they are getting resolved in a timely (what is timely depends on the severity of the defect and how many users are impacted) fashion and not ignored. If there are too many defects in the product, I would stay away from it and look for alternatives, provided there are competing alternatives.
Happy testing, and happy usage! Feel free to chat with value of testers.