I have read the interesting article about Michael Porter's ideas titled 'Why Do Good Managers Set Bad Strategies' (
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1594). The answers are interesting, although I have some concerns about the premise: Excellent managers can be very bad strategist and vice-versa (In WWI Germany was very well managed, but its long-term strategy proved disastrous, while the new and chaotic Soviet Union became a World power).

However, it is his statement of "Strategy has to do with what will make you unique" what make me scratch my head. In the current context of the software development industry, specifically in the context of a small professional services firm like the one I am working on, what we can bring that is unique?

Perhaps it is a self-interested answer. However, it is clear for me that currently that major differentiator among our competitors is Quality, used in the broadest possible terms. Quality understood as the set of processes that will be able to deliver in time in budget a solution a business need in accordance to the customers' expectations. Notice this would include managing the customer's expectations!

After more than ten years in the software industry, still surprises me that so few are trying to exploit this niche as differentiator. It still surprises me that many managers, visionaries, captains of industry and so on see QA as a luxury or fat to trim. In most of the cases, it is a simple marketing investment.

In an ad from Mercury, they say, "80% of applications are deployed untested. 100% of customers really hate that.” So, if this is the state of the industry, let me return to my suggestion and to the point of this lucubration: what about developing a strategy that will focus in the QA of your product as a way to make it unique?

The last but not the least. The article also includes the quote "If you don't pursue a direction for two or three years, it's meaningless." Putting the quote in the QA context: you should not waste energy and efforts implementing a lukewarm QA strategy. Do not set a policy and then constantly break it. For QA professionals it is frustrating and you will not achieve any good.

I have been reading the massive article

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnpag2/html/mtf.asp

posted in the Microsoft web site with the title of "Testing .NET Application Blocks–Version 1.0".

I can not say that I liked it. I consider it useful, I think that will take me some time to fully digest it contents, however, I would say that it could be written in a less bone-dry tone. For example, I should be excited to read the article after reading the introduction, not to consider that it could be appropriate to read it...

In addition, there are tendentious comments :-). For example
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnpag2/html/mtf_ch02.asp
"Testing Methodologies" is not an honest report about the different testing methodologies. It is a naked attempt of Agile apologetics. After the authors, Agile has no disadvantage at all! What about scalability for example? The more I know about Agile, the more attractive I find some aspects. However, you should not forget all the strings this methodology has attached: a competent, committed and engaged customer for starters....

In any case, if you have lots of patience, are not sleep deprived and have some time, it is a reading that I recommend.

As the lead tester at Visiphor Consulting Services, I find myself in the position of having to expose my opinion even in case in which I do not really have an opinion!

In this blog I will post some of my though about the art of testing, specially in the brave new world of SOA, .NET, Web services, integration platforms and hints of Agile methodology.