The "mystery" of software quality (I)-hypocritical Quality

<title></title>

Source: http://blog.csdn.net/KongDong/
Author: fasiondog

Note: The Administrative and Emotional Colors of quality mentioned in this article are only from the perspective of psychology, while winberger reveals and explores ways to improve management within the Organization. Therefore, we recommend that you do not unilaterally understand "quality ", as an excuse for failing to develop high-quality products. For an objective definition of quality, see instructor Zhu shaomin'sArticleWe recommend that you read this article first to avoid misunderstanding of quality:
Is the definition of quality always politically and emotionally colored?

 

 

What is quality? There seems to be a lot of answers, from "quality is zero defect", "quality is to meet customer needs" to "quality is to meet customer needs ", it seems that we have found the answer. But why can't these answers always solve my confusion?

• "Meeting customer needs is our only goal" has been the company's quality policy for so many years, however, in software development, why can't we keep shouting the "from the customer's point of view" slogan, but the idea of "from the customer's point of view" is always unable to be implemented in the development team?

• Once the project managers are under pressure on their progress, what quality and what from the customer's point of view, they will not hesitate to throw them out of the 9th cloud?

• Why does the process conformity index rapidly increase under the pressure of the company to improve the process conformity, while some teams have no fundamental progress in quality?

• Why did some products finally achieve the first development and achieve zero deviation, but they were secretly offered to the customer with another version, and thus won the company's award? Later, we found that the development process audit results of the products that have been awarded are also the same, and even the teams that are lagging behind in the same department. Other development teams are sneer at this!

• ......

Hypocritical Quality

The most recognized definition of quality is the degree to which the customer needs to be satisfied. It has never been doubted before. Everything is so natural, as if quality is justified. My thinking and understanding are stuck in "customers are different, need to be differentiated", "How should we measure the degree of satisfaction", and so on, however, it has never solved the confusion in my heart, and I have never been able to relate it to the various strange phenomena in our software development, except when there is no way to implement it, there is no way to shout "you want to consider the problem from the customer's perspective" to developers and testers! Until one day I saw three sets of Master winberger (quality. software. management. For me, this mystery is nothing more than a buzz. It brings together all the confusions and solves them one by one. It also gives me a more calm view of the various problems in development, so as to better deal with these seemingly simple but complex quality problems. What is the mystery of quality? What does the above definition of quality hide? The answer is so simple and hypocritical: "Quality is the value of a person. It is administrative and emotional !". "Administrative and emotional" means that the quality is not only good, but also has fewer defects, more functions, or better services. Everything lies in the customer's feelings! An example that is easy to ignore is: What do I fear most when I go to buy clothes? I am afraid that the waiters are too enthusiastic. I will always introduce this when I meet each other, their introductions are so detailed that I am always confused. Why? I know very little about the brand name and style, and their introduction almost always makes me feel so ignorant, which makes me very inferior (I have never realized it before ), so whenever I see a very enthusiastic waiter, I almost choose to escape. I will tell her that I just want to stroll around. Is their service poor? Obviously not. I will say they serve well, but this is not a good shopping experience for me, but I cannot say that their service quality is good, because they apparently did not achieve their purpose-to sell, and I also did not get what I want-to buy. Everything lies in the customer's feelings. This is no different from the customer-centered idea, but the key lies in the Quality Administration and emotional nature. When this is seen from the outside of the software organization, there is nothing unusual, but once you look back at the Development Organization, things are not that simple, it reveals another important feature beyond the "uncertainty" of software quality-Hierarchy . How to break the closeness of the internal quality layer is the key to a software organization's true "customer-centric". Otherwise, "customer-centric" can only be reduced to a single slogan. (To be continued)