You are on page 1of 21

HP ALM Online Training

http://cheyat.com/qa/hp-alm-onli
ne-training-tutorials

ALM Work Flow Requirement through


Deployment
Predictability
Heightened repeatability
Improved quality
Ready accommodation of
change

Why Testing

Why Test management


How do I know my release readiness
How do I manage my requirements
How do I track my test coverage
How do I monitor my Release progress
How do I assess the severity and priority of my defects
How do I base line my test artifacts

Why Test Management Tools

Test management is the practice of organizing and


controlling the process and artifacts required for the
testing effort.

Traditional tools
used for test
management
include:

Pen and paper


Word processors
Spreadsheets
Sharing in Drives (J:/)
Emails

Test Management Recommendations

Start test management activities early


Test iteratively
Reuse test artifacts
Utilize requirements-based testing
Leverage remote testing resources
End to End Traceability of Release requirements
Defining and enforcing a flexible testing process
Coordinate and integrate with the rest of development
Communicate status
Focus on goals and results
Automate to save time

Benefits

ALM Stakeholders

Project
Track release progress
Managers
Visibility into key project milestones

Full trending analysis and insight into


application projects
Clearly communicate to all stakeholders

Development
Improve developer efficiency
Team

Dashboar
d
Defect

Dashboard and Analysis


View
Release
Requirement

Dashboard and Analysis


View
Release
Requirement

Business
Define
Analysts
and track multiple requirement types
Bi-directional traceability from requirements to
requirements, tests and defects
Leverage existing assets in MS Word

Testing Team
Create test cases to adequately test the requirements

Consistent defect management process


across all projects and initiatives

Manage and control execution of manual and


automated tests

Integrated into developers IDE

Create defects from manually or directly from the


execution of manual and automated tests

Dashboard and Analysis


View
Release
Requirement
Testing
Defect 8

HP ALM Login Entities

Requirements Module

Domain

Projects

Root Folder

AFG_Projects
_ All

<LOB>_<Pr
oject
ID>_<Projec
t Name>

Project
Name

AFG_ RFC_
All

<LOB>_<RF
Cs>_<Year>

RFC_LOB_20
15
Jan

Sub Folder

Req 1

Test Plan/Test Lab module

Root Folder

Project A

RFC_LOB_20
15

RFC N

Bug
Fix_LOB_015
Jan

Bug
Fix_LOB_015
Bug Fix 1
Bug Fix N
Bug Fix 1

Dec
Bug Fix N

Reporting

Defects

Reporting

Test case N
Defects

Reporting

Regression
Test case N

Dec

<LOB>_<Bug
Fix&
Routine>_<Ye
ar>

Defects

Test case 1

Regression
Test case 1

RFC N
RFC 1

AFG_Bug
Fix
&Routine_
All

Test case 1

Reporting
module

Test case N

Req N

RFC 1

Test Case

Defects
module

Test case 1
Test case N
Regression
Test case 1
Regression
Test case N

Defects

Reporting

Testing Process An Overview (SOLMAN HP


ALM)
Business Blueprints

Test Planning

Test Execution
Automation Testing

HP ALM 12

SOLMAN

Business
Processes
Test Objects

Requiremen
ts

Test Results to
SOLMAN
Defects Module
Defects to
process in
SOLMAN
Manual Feed or
Import from Excel
Req/Test cases

Test
Requirements

Test Cases
Test sets to run
Test Results

Defects

SAP TAO
Component based
Automation

HP UFT
Test Automation Tool

HP Sprinter
Manual Testing

Testing Process Details (SOLMAN HP ALM)


Requirements Module
1. The Requirements can be loaded to HP ALM in any of the following three ways
Import are Export the business blueprint and test objects from SOLMAN SOLAR02
Note: Only the Business Processes/scenarios that has test object or transactions assigned to it can be export or
import to HP ALM
Capture the functional requirements in the defined excel spreadsheet and import the same to HP ALM
Create the required folder tree and enter requirements into that based on the functional requirements document
2. Once the Requirements are imported to the HP ALM then we can update/delete the requirement on accessing to the
respective requirement

Testing Process Details (SOLMAN HP ALM)


contd.
Test Plan Module
1. The test cases can be loaded to HP ALM in any of the following two ways
Directly enter the test cases and define the test steps in the Test plan module
Write the test cases in the defined excel spreadsheet and import the same to HP ALM test plan module
2. Each test case will be mapped to the corresponding requirements by editing the test case

Test Lab Module


3. The corresponding test cases need to be mapped pull to the Test lab module as a Test set for the test execution
4. These test case need to be executed either Manually or Automated run for the automated cases.
5. The test results must be transferred to SOLMAN SOLAR01/SOLAR02

Testing Process Details (SOLMAN HP ALM)


contd.
Defects Module
1. During the test execution the defects can be logged when the testing scenario is fail to meet the expected result
2. Defects falling under two types:
1. Defect: It is a regular defect that is been identified as to be processed in the HP ALM only by both Testing an
Development team and it goes though the defect lifecycle process in ALM
2. SAP related Defect: It is a defect that is been identified as to be processed in the SOLMAN by the development
team and it goes through the defect lifecycle process in SOLMAN (Defect Fix) and ALM (Defect logging, resetting
and Closing )
These can be viewed in the CRM_DNO_MONITOR or SM_WORKCENTER or CRM_ORDER transactions
codes in SOLMAN

HP ALM

Assign
responsibili
ty to SAP

SOLMAN

New

Forwarded

New

Received from
HPQC

Fixed

Proposed Solution

Closed

Confirmed

Defect Workflow

HP ALM Implementation Case Study


Client
Client Profile
Profile

Project
Project Background
Background

Client is one of the largest company that


offers a comprehensive array of financial
services to retail and institutional clients,
which includes annuities, retirement plans,
life insurance, mutual funds, managed
accounts, alternative investments, direct
banking,
institutional
investment
management,
employee
benefits,
and
financial planning.

Client
Client Requirements
Requirements

The client was looking to implement HP ALM


to address the following:

The Client wanted to assure quality with systematic automation


testing conducted over the course of one year before rolling out.
This massive project carried with it significant risk, as errors and
downtime could erode customer trust or even lead to business
losses.

Cognizant
Cognizant Solution
Solution Approach
Approach
Cognizant

focused

on

deploying

integratedQuality

management across the application lifecycle to focus and

Manage and create traceability between


requirements, tests artifacts and defects

prioritize testing resources at all phases and find and manage

Standardize process across application


lifecycle

By taking a systematic, risk-based, managed approach to

Facilitate
collaboration
communication
between
distributed teams

and
multiple,

defects earlier in the lifecycle when they are less costly to fix.
quality throughout the lifecycle, the result would lead to a fewer
issues in production and faster time to delivery.
The implementation allowed the Clients to prioritize testing

Manage and execute automated testing

based on risk. And with quality metrics and centralized

Make informed go/no go decisions

reporting, they were able to make informed decisions about

Provide a scalable architecture

application releases.

HP ALM Implementation Case Study

Benefits
Benefits achieved
achieved using
using HP
HP ALM
ALM

Reduced cost through centralized management and enforcement of


consistent workflows and processes
Increased efficiency by reducing duplication of effort and sharing best
practices
Increased visibility to quality status, requirement coverage and defect
trends in aggregate across projects and initiatives
Achieved significant savings by tracking key metrics against project
milestones
within
Project Planning and Tracking of HP Application
Benefits
gain
from
Benefits
gain
from
Management
ALM
ALM

Reduced cost through centralized management


and enforcement of consistent workflows and
processes
Reduced cost and increased efficiency
by reducing duplication of effort and
sharing best practices
Increased visibility to quality status,
requirement coverage and defect trends in
aggregate across projects and initiatives
Others

Business
Business Benefits
Benefits achieved
achieved
The

Client

was

able

to

minimize

business risk in this important project.


A quality assurance process has been
created for building next generation
systems.
Quantitative measures of IT quality and
performance have been established to
support increased business efficiency

Top
Top New
New Features
Features in
in
ALM
ALM
Project Planning & Tracking
Requirements Templates
Project/Template Reports
Traceability Matrix
Embedded Web Scorecards &
Graphs
Business Process Modeling
Integration
Test Configurations

Defect Categories

Category

Defect

Issue

New Req

Description

When a defect is logged its categorized as Defect by default. It states that the defect is considered to be
analyzed and fixed for the current release
When a defect is identified and after reviewing ,it has few dependencies to be verified like test data, test
steps to be carried etc. hence the defect will be categorized as Issue
When a defect is logged in which the test carried to related to that defect is not mention in the requirement.
Then the defect is considered as a New Req and it goes through the Change request process as AFG we
following today.

Defect Statuses & Descriptions


Status

Responsibility

Target Owner

New

Tester

Test Lead

Description

Tester/Business tester creates a defect during testing; the initial status of the defect will be in New status.
The New status defect will be assigned to Test Lea d for the Defect triage or analysis.

Pending
Rejected

Test Lead

Test Lead

Rejected

Test Lead

Test Lead

Deferred

Test Lead

Test Lead

Assigned

Test Lead

Functional/ DEV team

During defect meeting when the defect analysis results in to that the defect is not a valid one then test lead
changes the defect to Pending Reject status for the further discussion with the Functional team or Business
team.
Test lead will change the status of the defect to Rejected in following conditions:
Defect analysis results in to the decision that the system works as expected and its an invalid defect

Tester's misunderstanding of requirements or test scripts.

Tester mistakenly logged a duplicate defect that was already raised, in case of duplicate defect; the new one is

marked as Rejected and if any useful information from the new defect is copied over to the old defect.
Test Lead will Defer a defect when it is analyzed and

Not In-scope on functionality


Not in current scope but in future releases.
When these defects are need to be picked up and assign in future release then the test lead can change the

defect status to Assigned

Req. for info

Functional/DEV
team

Test Lead

Fixed

Functional/ DEV
team

Test Lead

Retest

Test Lead

Tester

Reopen

Tester

Functional/ DEV team

Successfully
Tested

Tester

Test Lead

Closed

Test Lead

NA

When a New defect is created by tester and it is considered as a valid defect, then the Test lead will assign to
the concern team (developer/Functional SME) and then the status will be changed to Assigned.
New defects will be picked first during the defect triage to decide the assignment.

Once the Defect is assigned to the Functional SME or the developer then they will look the defect and if any
clarification required on the defect then the clarification can be mentioned in defect comments and assign
back to the tester/test lead as "Req. for info".
Test Lead will consult tester and provide the necessary details for the defect and assign back to the same

Functional or Developer
After the defect is fixed, the status is changed to Fixed by Functional SME/Developer and assigned to Test lead for
the verification to proceed further for the retest
Once the test lead confirms that fixes are ready to test then changes the defect status to Retest and assigned to
the tester who is responsible for retest.
When the tester retest the defect and confirms that the fix does not resolve the defect completely, then changes
the status to Reopen and assign back the functional or development team.
When the tester retest the defect and confirms that the fix has worked fine, then defect the changes status to
Successfully Tested which will assign to test lead
Test lead will verify the Successfully tested defects and changes the status to Closed
Any new issues identified during retest should be created as a new defect rather than reopening the current defect.

Defect Priority levels


Priority is an outcome of subjective evaluation of how important an issue to the business. Other tasks in the queue and schedule
are factors that may impact the decision of prioritizing the Defect. It is relative, it shifts, and it is always a business decision.

Initial value for priority field will be set by the tester who creates the defects based on testing impact. During defect triage
meeting it business re-evaluates and updates the value, if needed.
DEV/business will participate in the defect triage meeting during the Testing (Functional/SIT/Regression) done by QA and will
assign / change the priority to new defects based on business impact.
Priority
Level

Business Impact

Testing Impact

P1

This has severe impact to the customer and continuing to


operate may not be possible. This must be fixed
immediately.

Defect is a blocking issue. The defect would impact the completion of testing
iteration if not resolved, and any testing cannot proceed until this defect is resolved

P2

This is major impact to the customer but does not halt


operations. This must be fixed as soon as possible and
before the release of the current version in development.

Defect is severe. This impacts the general behavior of the application. A workaround
may exist but its use is unsatisfactory. Test cases will be blocked due to this defect.

P3

This has major impact to the customer. The problem should


be addressed and fixed with the current version release if
time permits, or a patch to the release issued, if possible.

The failure impacts non-critical aspects of the system, behavior of functionality


under specific conditions. During testing this will result in test case failure, but will
not block the execution of the other test cases.

P4

This has minor impact to the customer. The flaw is usually


cosmetic to the customer in nature and only needs to be
fixed when there is sufficient time.

Cosmetic problem. During testing this will result in test case failure, but will not
block the execution of the other test cases.

Reports and Graphs


Defect Summary Report <as on date>
120

Test Summary Report <as on date>


20

10
100

10
10
8

60

12

21

40

12

20

Deferred

21

10

80

Rejected

23

10
8

23

21

10
8

21

18
10
5

16

Closed

14

UT

SIT

UAT

Retest

12

Fixed

10

Assigned

New

No Run
Blocked

0
SIT

Fail
Pass

Not Completed

UT

18

UAT

Lab