This is an incredibly common misconception. It is NOT an either-or situation for the vast majority of software projects. My data shows quite clearly that the number one driver of cost and schedule on most projects is low quality. On the order of 60% of all labor hours on a typical project are wasted fixing mistakes that, if fixed much earlier, would have been significantly less expensive. Think about it, if Rework is 60% then all value-added work cannot be more than 40%. Very simple actions, like Acceptance Test Driven Development (ATDD) done well can cut the Rework percentage in half. ATDD is thought of as a testing technique but it’s not. It’s actually a requirements technique: clarifying requirements by expressing them as test cases.

While quality is seen as an external activity to development, the answer to this question is "you can't". For the past few decades this has always been a challenge and there was never a bullet-proof solution for it. How do you ensure both are met, then? In my experience, you have to educate the entire team that quality must be built in to the application and not just tested for after something is "ready". Nothing is "ready" if it doesn't meet quality standards or a set of requirements. That philosophy leads every team member to do their own part in building a quality product by ensuring that everything they do not only is the best they could do, but it also conforms to a set of standards or requirements understood by the team.

Balancing quality assurance with project deadlines is indeed essential. Setting realistic deadlines that account for quality from the start is key, as is maintaining open communication to prevent rework. Incorporating parallel testing and quality checks throughout the project allows us to catch issues early and make adjustment without impacting timelines. This approach ensures both high standards and timely delivery.

QA and QC are complementary and interrelated, meaning that they work together to ensure the quality of the project. QA provides the basis and direction for QC, while QC provides the feedback and validation for QA. QA sets the quality standards and requirements, while QC checks and tests whether they are met

Balancing quality assurance and deadlines comes down to solid planning and open communication. At project initiation, focus on setting realistic timelines, break down tasks to keep things manageable, and define quality standards. As the project progresses, ensure that regular testing and code reviews can catch issues early to allow for adjustments to be made without derailing the timeline. Keep a close eye on progress and monitor potential risks, looping in key stakeholders as soon as something arises that may impact the project timeline or deadlines.

To balance quality assurance and project deadlines, start by setting clear quality standards and incorporating QA early through shift-left testing and automation. Prioritize testing on critical areas, use checkpoints for incremental QA, and streamline testing environments with DevOps tools like Terraform and Helm. Regular communication with stakeholders helps manage expectations and adapt timelines as needed. This approach ensures high quality without compromising deadlines.

Balancing quality assurance and project deadlines requires integrating quality into the overall project plan and making it everyone’s responsibility, not just the quality control team’s. As a project manager, one should incorporate best practices, checkpoints, and automation tools, ensuring critical aspects are tested at each stage before progressing. Agile practices like continuous feedback loops help address issues early, and transparency with tools like JIRA keeps the team aligned. Ultimately, quality and timelines are equally crucial.......delivering on time only matters if quality is also achieved.