By 
Understanding Core Competencies
In the early 1980s, GTE and NEC were both poised to make significant strides in the information technology industry. Yet, their trajectories diverged dramatically. NEC emerged as a global leader in telecommunications, semiconductors, and mainframes, while GTE’s position became increasingly limited.
What sets NEC apart? It was the company’s strategic focus on its core competencies. NEC invested heavily in developing and nurturing these fundamental strengths, while GTE struggled to identify and prioritize its core competencies. This lack of clarity led to a fragmented organization that hindered innovation and competitiveness.
A company’s core competencies are the unique skills and capabilities that set it apart from its competitors. They are the collective learning within the organization, encompassing the ability to coordinate diverse production skills and integrate various technologies. Moreover, core competencies require a commitment to cross-functional collaboration and breaking down organizational silos.
By organizing around core competencies, companies can foster a culture of innovation, efficiency, and long-term sustainability. This approach allows them to leverage their unique strengths to create valuable products and services, ensuring their relevance in an ever-evolving marketplace.
Before reading any further, answer these questions…
- What are your organization’s core competencies?
- QA/QE, what is the outcome I want from this practice in the organization?
- What are the roadblocks to achieving #2 today?
Introduction to Quality Assurance and Engineering
In today’s fast-paced software development landscape, delivering high-quality products is paramount. Quality assurance (QA) and Quality Engineering (QE) play a critical role in ensuring that any piece of software meets customer expectations. While the need for QA/QE is undeniable, the decision of whether to maintain an in-house team or outsource these services can be complex. This blog will dive into the pros and cons of both approaches, helping you make an informed decision.
The Growing Importance of QA
Recent Gartner findings underscore the increasing emphasis on quality assurance. With businesses shifting their focus from productivity to quality, effective QA processes are now more crucial than ever.
Whether you choose an in-house or outsourced approach, the goal remains the same: to deliver exceptional software that delights customers.
Comparative Analysis: In-house vs. Outsourced QA Testing
- Collaboration: In-house teams or co-located teams offer equal collaboration over the QA/QE process and enable seamless collaboration with development teams.
- Specialized Knowledge: Internal teams can possess deep domain knowledge of the product and company culture, leading to more targeted testing, but a veteran QA/QE specialist may bring insights, accelerators and frameworks that in-house teams may take months or even years to build.
- Long-Term Capability: Building an in-house QA team can become a long-term capability but maintaining and managing the QA/QE function in terms of talent, career paths, hiring and retention can become a burden. Outsourced QA teams may build the same capabilities, faster.
- Real-Time Response: In-house or outsourced teams can address issues promptly, ensuring rapid problem resolution. This must be built into the SLAs of the teams and the KPI/KPA (in-house) or contract for (outsourced) teams.
- Higher Costs: Maintaining an in-house QA team can be expensive due to salaries, benefits, and infrastructure.
- Limited Scalability: Scaling an in-house team can be challenging, especially during peak periods, niche skillsets. Retention and attrition, hiring, team management are costs that need to be incurred. Outsourcing can offer cost savings by eliminating overhead expenses.
- Potential for Internal Bias: In-house teams may be less objective in their testing, potentially overlooking issues.
- Specialized Expertise: Outsourced providers often have access to a pool of skilled QA professionals with diverse expertise. This is due to the fact that they do just QA/QE at scale.
- Objectivity: External testers can provide a fresh perspective and identify issues that may be overlooked by internal teams.
- Perceived Loss of Control: Outsourcing can sometimes lead to a perceived loss of control over the QA process.
Choosing the Right Approach
The decision between in-house and outsourced QA depends on various factors, including;
- Project Requirements: Consider the complexity, timeline, and specific needs of your project.
- Available Budget: Evaluate the cost implications of both approaches, including potential long-term savings.
- Current Expertise: Assess the availability of in-house QA expertise and the benefits of specialized external knowledge.
- Control and Collaboration: Determine how important control and close collaboration are to your project.
- Outcomes and Engagement Model: Determine the outcome and engagement model which is a win – win for all stakeholders.
Exploring A Hybrid Approach
A hybrid approach, combining in-house and outsourced QA, can be a viable option for many organizations. This approach allows for leveraging the strengths of both models while mitigating their weaknesses. By integrating the agility and specialized knowledge of outsourced teams with the deep understanding and commitment of in-house resources, organizations can create a robust quality engineering framework that enhances overall product quality.
Ultimately, the choice between in-house and outsourced QA is not merely a logistical decision; it is a strategic one that can significantly impact your organization’s success. By carefully evaluating your specific needs and aligning them with the right approach, you can ensure that your quality engineering efforts are not only effective but also sustainable in the long run.
Embrace the opportunity to innovate and adapt, as the landscape of quality assurance continues to evolve, and positions your organization for success in delivering exceptional software products.
About the Author
Partner & Senior Vice President covering North America region across Banking, Insurance, Capital Markets, Financial Services, Retail, Consumer, Tech & Digital industry practices.
At QualityKiosk, he leads the strategic planning, new market & customer acquisition function and drives strategic initiatives to move the organization into the next orbit of growth. Gauraav specializes in building marketing and sales teams through strategic interventions in areas of people, process, and technology as he believes technology is an enabler to bridge the gap between brands and consumers.
Before consulting, Gauraav has worked in Marketing, Sales and Consulting roles across CSC, Position2 Inc. and Exilant Technologies.
Focus topics: Digitalization, Digital Transformation, Breakthrough Growth Strategy (organic and inorganic), Go-to-Market Strategy, Marketing & Sales Strategy.
Market experience: USA, UK, Singapore, India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, Middle East.
