This content originally appeared on DEV Community and was authored by Juliano
By Juliano Moreno
QA Specialist | Platform Engineering
Everyone already understands (or pretends to understand) that quality is everyone's responsibility. That testing isn't just done at the end. That automation is essential. That QA isn't a phase, it's a flow.
But the question remains relevant:
If the theory is so clear, why does nothing change in practice?
Squads continue to outsource quality to QA. Developers keep pushing code without coverage. PMs continue to prioritize speed and deliver technical debt. And QA is still called at the end with a simple: "Can you validate this for us?"
The culture of quality remains just talk.
The biggest barrier isn't technical. It's a lazy mindset. And a lack of courage.
What's missing isn't a tool. It's commitment.
It's not more pipelines that will save us. It's a change in behavior.
Companies say quality is a priority — but they keep QA isolated.
Developers say they test — but they leave 80% of coverage for QA.
PMs say they trust the team — but they don't involve QA in conception.
And QAs themselves often wait to be called instead of prompting change.
The truth is simple (and uncomfortable):
As long as QA is seen as the "delivery guarantor," engineering will continue to make mistakes with confidence.
Three behaviors that still hinder evolution
1. QA as a ready-code inspector
If you call QA after everything has been delivered, you don't want quality.
You want someone to clean up the mess.
2. Developer as a feature delivery person
Code without tests, without rollback, without contract, without traceability.
But the commit is there: "finished successfully."
3. PM as a backlog dispatcher
"Deliver first, then we'll see if it's good."
Let the customer experience suffer.
What each role needs to face head-on
Developers
If you think testing is QA's job, you're not an engineer.
You're a code assembler hoping it works out.
If your code has no coverage, it's not ready. Period.
Tech Leads
If you don't demand tests, don't prioritize observability, and don't ensure testable architecture, you're leading the squad towards silent chaos.
The responsibility for failures that only appear in production is yours.
Don't outsource it to QA.
Product Managers / POs
If your measure of success is just on-time delivery, you're delivering wrong.
A feature with a bug isn't delivery.
It's cost, rework, and loss of trust disguised as value.
QAs
If you're still waiting to be triggered to "validate," you're behind.
If you don't master tools, automation, test architecture, CI/CD, and risk analysis, your relevance is in countdown.
You're not here to validate.
You're here to build quality together — from the start.
Do we really need a QA Coach?
The concept of a QA Coach can be valuable in contexts where the quality culture is still in its early stages. However, it's important to reflect: if Quality Engineers and QA Managers can operate at their full potential, fostering the culture and practices from conception, the role of a QA Coach can naturally integrate into their responsibilities. Perhaps the issue isn't creating a new function, but rather empowering and demanding more from existing ones. What we truly need is more courage to apply what we already know.
The right structure already exists — but needs to be taken seriously
Strategic Quality Engineer
Translates quality policy into concrete technical decisions.
Doesn't execute tests. They provoke, structure, and ensure the team delivers reliability.
QA Lead / Manager
Defines strategy, governs practices, and measures the real impact of quality.
If limited to tracking bugs per squad? It's underutilized.
The real transformation only begins when everyone stops hiding behind QA
- A developer who doesn't test is scheduled rework.
- A PM who ignores QA in discovery is prioritizing failure.
- A Tech Lead who doesn't demand technical quality is just managing delivery, not leading.
- A QA who doesn't challenge the team is settling for the role of a filter.
Senior leadership is the pillar of quality
Quality culture doesn't just sprout from the ground. It is sown and cultivated by leadership. If directors, VPs, and CTOs don't embody quality, don't demand it, and don't reward it, all foundational efforts will be in vain. It is the role of senior management to:
- Define quality as a strategic and non-negotiable priority.
- Invest in training and upskilling to raise the technical bar for all of engineering.
- Adjust incentive systems: Reward teams for quality and stability, not just raw delivery speed. Costly production errors should lead to reflection and learning, not just temporary fixes.
- Break down silos: Encourage collaboration and shared responsibility, making it clear that quality is a success metric for the entire product, not just a single team or individual.
Change hurts, but the cost of non-quality hurts more
Thinking that "speed" means delivering anything quickly is an expensive illusion. A bug in production isn't just an inconvenience; it's direct damage:
- Rework: The time spent fixing post-launch bugs is far greater than preventing them early on.
- Revenue loss: Frustrated customers migrate to competitors.
- Brand damage: Your company's reputation is harmed.
- Operational cost: Incidents generate overtime, on-call teams, and can even lead to fines or compliance issues.
View quality as a strategic investment, not a cost. Every hour invested in prevention is a saving of days (or weeks!) of future headaches and losses.
Conclusion: Who has the courage to build quality?
QA won't disappear. But those who don't evolve will.
The squad that still treats QA as the final stage has already lost. They just haven't realized it yet.
The question isn't "who tests."
The question is: who has the courage to ensure that quality is being built every day — from the first commit?
And, more importantly: who has the courage to be the voice of quality, even when it's unpopular or challenges the status quo?
This content originally appeared on DEV Community and was authored by Juliano
Juliano | Sciencx (2025-06-27T15:39:35+00:00) What still prevents QA from being strategic? (And how to change the game). Retrieved from https://www.scien.cx/2025/06/27/what-still-prevents-qa-from-being-strategic-and-how-to-change-the-game/
Please log in to upload a file.
There are no updates yet.
Click the Upload button above to add an update.