Could you share any evidence that would demonstrate the productivity, quality of work, or the impact of the engagement?
First of all, they are quite fast and flexible. Whenever there’s a project, they can deliver fast even when there’s little time. The testing is very carefully done; there’s nothing missing. They’re always very accurate, so it’s very helpful for us. Otherwise, we wouldn’t use them. They have a good, fair price. It works well from that perspective.
How did QA Madness perform from a project management standpoint?
Communication is happening via email. Once we have aligned on a project’s costs, they send a checklist of what they need for testing. This checklist is always the same: we send them download links, our expectations, and a quick introduction and description of the project. Once they have received that, they start with the testing.
Depending on how big the whole project is, they’ll send us the report of functional testing after a couple of days also via email. It’s a PDF document with detailed descriptions of bugs and functionalities that aren’t working 100%. We then take the document and give it to our development team, who’ll go through the document, fixing bugs and improving things. We don’t have calls where QA Madness present their results. If we have questions, of course, we can ask, but it’s usually very clear.
What did you find most impressive about QA Madness?
I don’t have too much experience with other partners. Their price is surprisingly good because they are based in Lithuania, so the price level there is different than in central Europe. For us, it’s super efficient and cost-effective to outsource testing. They are quite flexible and fast, so that’s also something that I would highlight. The turnaround time is usually only 2-days.
Are there any areas QA Madness could improve?
It would be helpful for QA Madness to present their results in a nicer way. For example, a 30-minute call with them where they give us some thoughts that are not written in the document. After a successful testing round, we could have a discussion about it together rather than via reports. I think that’s related to their price. They do a really good price, so we would not expect that. At some point, it would be a next step or an improvement.