Markdown Editor

Software Quality Assurance Plan Template (IEEE 730)

SQA plan: organisation and independence, product and process assurance, reviews and audits, corrective action, suppliers, metrics

Pengujian & KualitasLengkapIEEE 730-2014sqaplanmath

Cara menggunakan: Use it when a project or contract needs a documented quality assurance plan. Fill organisation and independence first so findings can be escalated outside the delivery chain. The main pitfall is planning SQA activities that produce no records an auditor can check.

Pratinjau

Software Quality Assurance Plan: [Project or product name]

Complete Software Quality Assurance Plan (SQAP). The structure follows the SQA plan content described in IEEE 730-2014: purpose and scope, organisation and independence, SQA activities across the life cycle (product assurance and process assurance), standards, reviews and audits, problem reporting, tools, supplier control, records, training, risk and metrics. Replace every [bracketed] value and every row marked Example.

Document control

FieldValue
Document ID[SQAP-PROJECT-001]
Project / product[Project name] [release or contract number]
Version[0.1]
Status[Draft / In review / Approved / Superseded]
Owner[@sqa-lead]
Classification[Internal / Confidential]
Last updatedYYYY-MM-DD
Contract or quality requirements[Contract clause / customer quality requirement / internal QMS procedure]
Related documents[Project management plan], [SCM plan], [V&V plan], [Test strategy], [Risk register]

Approvals

RoleNameDecisionDate
SQA lead[@name][Approved / Rejected / Approved with comments]YYYY-MM-DD
Project manager[@name][Decision]YYYY-MM-DD
Head of quality[@name][Decision]YYYY-MM-DD
Customer representative (if contractual)[@name][Decision]YYYY-MM-DD

Revision history

VersionDateAuthorChange summary
0.1YYYY-MM-DD[@name]Initial draft
0.2YYYY-MM-DD[@name]Example: Added supplier audit for the outsourced mobile client
1.0YYYY-MM-DD[@name]Example: Approved at project kick-off

Contents

1. Purpose and scope

1.1 Purpose

This plan defines how [organisation] will provide objective evidence that [project name] produces software, documentation and services that conform to their requirements, and that the project follows its agreed processes. It is the reference for all SQA tasks, reviews and audits.

1.2 Scope

AspectIn scopeOut of scope
Products[Web application, REST API, mobile app, user documentation][Third-party SaaS used as-is]
Life-cycle phasesConcept to transition into operationsOperations after warranty period
Organisations[Internal teams, supplier X][Customer IT department]
ProcessesRequirements, design, construction, testing, configuration management, release[Corporate procurement]

1.3 Quality requirements and objectives

IDQuality objectiveMeasureTarget
QO-01Example: Deliverables pass review first timePercentage of documents approved without major findings>= 80%
QO-02Example: Process conformanceAudit findings of major severity per quarter0
QO-03Example: Product quality in operationSeverity-1 incidents in first 90 days after release0
[QO-nn][Objective][Measure][Target]

1.4 Tailoring

[State which parts of the organisation's quality management system or of this template are tailored for the project, why, and who approved it. Example: "Formal inspection replaced by pull-request review for code with risk class C, approved by head of quality YYYY-MM-DD."]

2. Organisation and independence

2.1 Organisation

The SQA lead reports to the head of quality, not to the project manager, so that findings can be escalated without depending on the delivery chain.

2.2 Responsibilities

RoleSQA responsibilities
Head of qualityApproves this plan; receives escalations; assigns SQA staff
SQA leadPlans and performs SQA activities; reports findings; tracks corrective actions
Project managerProvides resources and access; ensures corrective actions are implemented
Technical leadsApply standards; host reviews; respond to findings
Test managerProvides test evidence; participates in product assurance
Configuration managerSupports configuration audits; maintains baselines
Supplier quality contactDelivers supplier quality records; hosts supplier audits

2.3 Independence

DimensionArrangementResidual concern
TechnicalSQA staff did not author the products they assessNone
ManagerialSQA lead reports to head of qualityShared sponsor; escalation path to quality board
FinancialSQA budget set by quality departmentNone

2.4 Escalation

Unresolved findings are escalated in this order: technical lead (5 working days) -> project manager (5 working days) -> head of quality -> project sponsor. Escalations are recorded in the finding log.

3. Standards, practices and conventions

AreaStandard, practice or conventionVersionConformance checked by
Requirements[SRS template based on ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148][x.y]Document review
Design[Architecture description template, ADR practice][x.y]Design review
Code[Coding standard], [lint configuration][x.y]Static analysis, code review
Testing[Test strategy TS-ORG-001][x.y]Test readiness review, test audit
Security[Secure development standard], OWASP ASVS level [2][x.y]Security review
AccessibilityWCAG 2.2 level AA2.2Accessibility audit
Documentation[Style guide][x.y]Document review
Configuration management[SCM plan SCMP-xxx][x.y]Configuration audit

4. SQA activities by life-cycle phase

PhaseSQA activityInputOutput (record)Responsible
InitiationReview project plans for quality requirementsProject plan, contractPlan review reportSQA lead
InitiationConfirm standards and tools are definedThis plan, standards listReadiness checklistSQA lead
RequirementsParticipate in requirements review; check traceabilitySRS, stakeholder needsReview record, traceability checkSQA lead, analysts
DesignCheck design review is held and findings closedArchitecture, ADRsReview recordSQA lead
ConstructionSample code reviews for conformance to coding standardPull requestsSampling reportSQA engineer
ConstructionCheck CI quality gates are enforcedPipeline configurationGate audit recordSQA engineer
TestingTest readiness review; audit test execution against planTest plan, test logsAudit reportSQA lead
ReleasePhysical and functional configuration audit supportRelease baselineAudit reportSQA lead, CM
ReleaseConfirm completion criteria and open findings before go-liveTest completion reportRelease quality statementSQA lead
TransitionCheck handover documents and training recordsRunbooks, user guidesHandover checklistSQA engineer
ClosureLessons learned; SQA effectiveness reviewFinding log, metricsClosure reportSQA lead

5. Product assurance

5.1 Products subject to assurance

ProductAssessment methodCriteriaFrequency
Example: Software requirements specificationFormal review with checklistTemplate conformance, testable requirements, traceabilityEach baseline
Example: Source codeSampling of merged pull requests (10% or at least 5 per sprint)Coding standard, review evidence, tests presentEach sprint
Example: Release packagePhysical configuration auditContents match release baseline and release notesEach release
Example: User documentationReview against style guideAccuracy, completeness, accessibilityEach release
[Product][Method][Criteria][Frequency]

5.2 Conformance evaluation

Each assessment produces a result of Conformant, Conformant with minor findings, or Non-conformant. Non-conformant products are not baselined until the findings are closed or a waiver is approved (section 8.4).

5.3 Acceptability of products

[Describe how SQA checks that products meet customer acceptance criteria, for example by reviewing the UAT plan and witnessing a sample of acceptance tests.]

5.4 Life-cycle support and measurement of products

Product quality measures (defect density, test coverage, static analysis violations) are collected as described in section 14 and reviewed at each phase gate.

6. Process assurance

ProcessWhat SQA checksMethodFrequency
Requirements managementChanges go through change control; traceability maintainedAudit of change log and trace matrixMonthly
DesignDecisions recorded as ADRs; reviews heldSample of ADRs and review minutesEach release
Code reviewEvery merge has an approved review by someone other than the authorRepository settings check and samplingEach sprint
TestingTests executed per plan; results recorded; defects triagedAudit of test logsEach test cycle
Configuration managementBaselines, branching and change control per SCM planConfiguration auditEach release
Release managementGo/no-go criteria applied and recordedWitness go/no-go meetingEach release
Supplier managementSupplier follows agreed processSupplier audit (section 10)[Twice per contract]

6.1 Assessment of the project's life-cycle model

[Confirm that the project's chosen life-cycle model and its plans are consistent with the organisation's processes and the contract, and that the plans themselves are adequate. Record the result in the plan review report.]

6.2 Assessment of the environment for development

[Check that development, build and test environments are controlled: access, versions, backups, and that tools are qualified where required.]

7. Reviews and audits schedule

IDReview or auditTypeTimingParticipantsExit criteria
RA-01Plan reviewManagement reviewWeek 2PM, SQA lead, head of qualityPlans approved
RA-02Requirements reviewTechnical reviewEnd of requirements phaseAnalysts, architects, test lead, SQANo open major findings
RA-03Design reviewTechnical reviewBefore construction of each incrementArchitects, leads, SQAADRs approved
RA-04Process audit: code review and CI gatesAuditMonthlySQA engineer, tech leadFindings logged
RA-05Test readiness reviewTechnical reviewBefore system testTest manager, PM, SQAEntry criteria met
RA-06Functional and physical configuration auditAuditBefore releaseCM, SQA, test managerBaseline verified
RA-07Supplier auditAuditMonth 3 and month 8Supplier, SQA leadFindings agreed

8. Problem reporting and corrective action

8.1 Problem types

TypeExampleTracked inOwner
Product defectFunction fails a testIssue tracker, project [KEY]Development
Document findingRequirement not testableReview recordDocument author
Process non-conformanceMerge without reviewSQA finding logProcess owner
Supplier non-conformanceDeliverable missing test evidenceSupplier finding logSupplier manager

8.2 Finding severity

SeverityMeaningResponse time
MajorRequirement, contract or standard clearly not met; risk to product or customerCorrective action plan within 5 working days
MinorIsolated lapse with limited effectCorrective action within 20 working days
ObservationImprovement opportunityConsidered at next retrospective

8.3 Corrective action process

Every major or minor finding follows the loop below. SQA closes a finding only after checking that the action removed the cause, not just the symptom.

8.4 Waivers

A non-conformance that will not be corrected requires a waiver with the reason, the risk, the compensating measure and approval by [the head of quality and the product owner]. Waivers are listed in the release quality statement.

9. Tools, techniques and methods

PurposeTool or methodQualification needed?
Finding and action tracking[Issue tracker, SQA project]No
Static analysis[Tool] with ruleset [name]Yes, ruleset reviewed annually
Code coverage[Tool]No
Document reviewChecklist-based review, [review tool]No
AuditSampling with audit checklist; interviewsNo
Root cause analysisFive whys, cause-and-effect diagramNo

10. Supplier and subcontractor control

SupplierProduct or serviceQuality requirements flowed downEvidence requiredAssurance method
Example: [Supplier A]Mobile client developmentCoding standard, test strategy, security standardTest reports, static analysis reports, review records each sprintSupplier audit twice per contract; sampling of deliveries
Example: [Open-source component]LibrariesDependency policySBOM, vulnerability scanAutomated scan in CI
[Supplier][Product][Requirements][Evidence][Method]

Acceptance of supplier deliveries requires: delivery checklist complete, evidence received, and no open major findings.

11. Risk management

IDRiskL (1-5)I (1-5)MitigationOwner
QR-01Example: Schedule pressure leads to skipped reviews44Reviews are CI-enforced merge checks; SQA monthly sampling[@pm]
QR-02Example: Single SQA engineer for two teams33Prioritise high-risk components; borrow from quality pool during release[@head-of-quality]
QR-03Example: Supplier does not share test evidence24Contract clause with payment milestone tied to evidence[@procurement]
[QR-nn][Risk][L][I][Mitigation][@name]

12. Records collection, maintenance and retention

RecordFormat and locationOwnerRetention
Review records and checklists[Wiki / document system path]Review moderator[Project life + 3 years]
Audit reports[Path]SQA lead[Project life + 3 years]
Finding and corrective action log[Issue tracker project]SQA lead[Project life + 3 years]
Waivers[Path]Head of quality[Project life + 3 years]
Release quality statements[Path]SQA lead[Product life]
Supplier audit reports[Path]SQA lead[Contract term + 3 years]

Records are protected from unauthorised change by [access control and version history] and backed up [daily].

13. Training

AudienceTrainingMethodBy when
SQA staffProject domain and architecture overviewBriefing by architectWeek 2
SQA staffInternal auditor skillsCourseBefore first audit
DevelopersCoding and security standardWorkshop, 2 hoursWeek 3
ReviewersReview checklist useWalkthroughBefore requirements review
[Audience][Training][Method]YYYY-MM-DD

14. Metrics

MetricDefinitionTargetAction thresholdReviewed by
Review effectivenessMajor findings found in review / major defects found later in the same product>= 2.0< 1.0SQA lead
Finding closure timeMedian days from finding raised to verified closure<= 15> 30Head of quality
Overdue corrective actionsCount of actions past due date0> 3Project manager
Process conformanceSampled items conformant / sampled items>= 95%< 90%SQA lead
Escaped defect rateSeverity-1 and severity-2 defects found in production per release0> 1Quality board

Review effectiveness is calculated as

RE=FreviewFlater+1RE = \frac{F_{\text{review}}}{F_{\text{later}} + 1}

where FreviewF_{\text{review}} is major findings found in reviews and FlaterF_{\text{later}} is major defects in the same product found in test or operation; adding one avoids division by zero.

15. Glossary and references

TermMeaning in this plan
Product assuranceActivities that check work products conform to requirements and standards
Process assuranceActivities that check the project follows its defined processes
FindingA documented result of a review or audit: non-conformance or observation
WaiverApproved, recorded decision to accept a non-conformance

References: [Project management plan], [SCM plan], [V&V plan], [Test strategy], [Organisation QMS procedures], IEEE 730-2014, IEEE Standard for Software Quality Assurance Processes.

Standard and licence note

Structure aligned with IEEE 730-2014, IEEE Standard for Software Quality Assurance Processes, SQA plan content. This template is original text written for this collection and reproduces no text from the standard; obtain the standard from IEEE for its normative requirements. Template licence: MIT.

Templat terkait