TiP is misunderstood – perhaps DDQ is Better

12 January, 2015 (06:51) | Uncategorized | By: seth

I spent a long time talking to folks about the merits of a conscientious Testing in Production (TiP) strategy.  But I knew TiP had a bad rap.  I even shared the story of how some would mischaracterize it as a common and costly technical malpractice

While evangelizing TiP, I and my Microsoft colleagues would happily post this picture wherever we could

imageYet I knew the original poster was not so enthused with TiP.   Comments on TiP were supposing this was not a conscientious and risk-mitigated strategy, but instead devs behaving badly:

Then blame all issues on QA -_-

That’s our motto here. Doesn’t work to well in practice, actually.

Now I have returned to Amazon after spending 6 years at Microsoft.  From the following it looks like I have some education to do.


On the other hand, who can argue with Data-Driven Quality (DDQ).  (Except maybe a HiPPO).  DDQ is also more expansive than TiP, leveraging all data streams whether from production, customer research, or pre-release engineering.  So TiP was fun, but DDQ is the future.


Pingback from Testing Bits — 1/11/15 – 1/17/15 | Testing Curator Blog
Time January 19, 2015 at 9:29 am

[…] TiP is misunderstood — perhaps DDQ is Better – Seth Eliot – https://setheliot.com/blog/2015/01/12/tip-is-misunderstood-ddq-is-better/ […]

Pingback from Seth Eliot's Blog » Blog Archive » Dog bone approach to testing
Time May 22, 2015 at 2:52 pm

[…] (yeah, I went back to using TiP instead of DDQ…) […]

Write a comment