Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

The software industry's move to have developers own testing was a business decision that ignored developers' aversion and lack of aptitude for QA tasks. This organizational failure, not a skills problem, directly led to declining software quality across the industry.

Related Insights

The "Shift Left" philosophy was meant to integrate quality expertise earlier in the development process. However, many companies misinterpreted it as simply making developers responsible for QA tasks, rather than embedding QA professionals into design and planning, leading to poor outcomes.

As AI generates vast quantities of code, the primary engineering challenge shifts from production to quality assurance. The new bottleneck is the limited human attention available to review, understand, and manage the quality of the codebase, leading to increased fragility and "slop" in production.

QA professionals should evolve beyond verifying that code works as specified. Their strategic value is in validating that features serve the intended business purpose and meet customer needs—a function often missing between business requests and development execution.

Exceptional people in flawed systems will produce subpar results. Before focusing on individual performance, leaders must ensure the underlying systems are reliable and resilient. As shown by the Southwest Airlines software meltdown, blaming employees for systemic failures masks the root cause and prevents meaningful improvement.

A successful reorg simplifies work, but delayering often does the opposite. Pushing management, QA, and coordination tasks onto developers dramatically increases their cognitive load, harming their primary function and leading to burnout. This is a key failure metric for any flattening initiative.

Assigning error analysis to engineers or external teams is a huge pitfall. The process of reviewing traces and identifying failures is where product taste, domain expertise, and unique user understanding are embedded into the AI. It is a core product management function, not a technical task to be delegated.

Despite the push for more automation, a World Quality Report found that 47% of organizations reported more escaped defects as automation grew. This suggests that automation without strategic human oversight and systems thinking can degrade, not improve, quality.

Businesses often celebrate salary savings from reducing QA headcount. A truthful ROI calculation, however, must subtract the often-hidden downstream costs of increased rework, incident recovery, and the opportunity cost of developers fixing bugs instead of building new features.

As AI automates the 'write code' step, the primary role for human engineers shifts downstream. They will be increasingly responsible for testing and manual verification—tasks historically disliked by developers and previously handled by dedicated QA teams.

According to a GitLab DevSecOps report, eliminating QA roles resulted in developers taking on 40% more testing tasks. Alarmingly, this led to a 56% increase in downstream incidents, showing increased developer effort fails to compensate for the loss of specialized QA expertise.