Page - 170 - in The Future of Software Quality Assurance

170 M.F. Tannian Fig. 5 Design thinking is central to the design candidate development processes objectivestobeavoidedorpostponed.Only in the limitedpremarketevaluationwill users have an opportunity for intense independent, self-directed use of the product or service. Assuming all goes well, the design thinking outcome is a highly promising prototype or proof of concept. The result will likely be limited in production level qualities, such as resiliency, reliability, and performance. Production shortcomings in these behind-the-scenes functional qualities will undermine the goodwill pro- vided by a design’s potential. Imagine if your ride-hailing app failed to coordinate a ride successfully 20% or more of the time. The novelty of a ride hailing app will compensate for premarket quality during final user evaluation. However, if the app is being marketed beyond a controlled evaluation, poor reliability will not be well received. How many times can users be disappointed in performance or reliability before the level of embracingquality slips towards rejected? Consider proposals to deploydesign-thinkingprototypesforgeneralusecarefully. Havingobtainedexperimentalevidenceofwhat featurefunctionalityandfeature sets are minimally sufficient, the user experience-orientedspecifications of MMFs and MVP are likely to align with the market. Ideally the outcome of utilizing a MVP strategy is to earn revenue sooner, minimize costs, and maximize return on investment. However, there is likely to be significant tension as to what constitutes minimally necessary and sufficient for requirements that will address qualities like reliability, fitness for use, security, privacy, and performance. Design thinking is unlikely to producemuchmore than limited consideredopinionon the significance and character of qualities users do not directly experience or recognize in context. Products and services that can be managed with continuous deployment may be