Could you share any evidence that would demonstrate the productivity, quality of work, or the impact of the engagement?
Patagonian Tech does quality assurance, testing, and reduces bugs in the production. We had another firm that was previously in charge of this, but Patagonian Tech handles all of it now. This is one of the main insights. Another important contribution was the visual as well as the functional quality of the new modules and new functionalities that were implemented.
How did Patagonian Tech perform from a project management standpoint?
We used JIRA, in which we’ve grouped all activities and epics. Epics are the big functionalities of the system, and from the epics, we define a series of user stories and we have everything located there: the epics, the different impacted users, granular activities, and techniques that are connected to an effective UX execution. In JIRA, we have all of the abilities, testing tickets, and different releases that are going into production. We have documented and organized all products or tickets that are going to be rolled out in every version.
All of the communication is managed through JIRA, even the infrastructure is also there. The business communication is independent.
What did you find most impressive about Patagonian Tech?
The main highlight is the sense of project ownership and the commitment level of all the people participating in the team. They understand the sensibility and other urgent topics and critical aspects of the business.
Are there any areas Patagonian Tech could improve?
The main area of improvement at the moment are the instances that are not within the frame of the project. Since it’s the same team that implements new initiatives and bug fixes, they can better communicate their findings within the platform and attack certain urgent topics that we tend to disregard. Perhaps, we are not communicating the cases in detail, but it is something we can start improving.