In my role at Inspired Testing, I speak with clients across multiple industries every week. From financial services to retail, healthcare to logistics, there's one issue that surfaces in nearly every conversation: the disconnect between software testing and quality assurance.

It's a problem that's costing organisations millions in rework, missed deadlines, and damaged reputations. And here's the thing that surprises most people: even companies that have adopted Agile are still getting this fundamentally wrong.

The ‘safety net’ mentality

Most organisations today still view quality assurance as the last step before going live. It's treated as a safety net, something you do right at the end to catch whatever falls through the cracks.

This outdated perspective turns testing into reactive firefighting. By the time testers discover defects, it's too late – you're looking at costly rework and missed deadlines.

Quality isn’t a phase. It’s a mindset — continuously encouraged, embedded from day one, and owned by everyone.

Instead of seeing testing as a checkbox exercise at the end of delivery, we need to recognise what it actually is by that stage: damage control. You're not improving quality; you're just measuring how bad things have become.

A real-world example

We often meet organisations that feel their QA team, once seen as a safety net, has become the biggest blocker in their business.

Recently we spent time with a number of key clients, interviewing people across various roles – architects, business analysts, developers, testers, tech leads, and product owners. What we discovered was revealing.

Their issues didn't start with QA at all. From the very beginning, requirements were unclear, collaboration was poor, and teams weren't allowed to talk to each other directly.

Here's how their typical process worked: BAs would receive a one-liner requirement from a product owner, then spend weeks getting approval for their documentation. Meanwhile, developers needed to start building the features without clear specifications.

By the time the requirement landed with the testers, they had no context. What should I test? How does this integrate with other systems? What's the expected behaviour?

Because testing happened at the last step before go-live, it was perceived as the blocker. Nobody looked at the BA component or the development phase, only at testing, because that's where the delays became visible.

Testing vs quality assurance: understanding the difference

Here's the fundamental distinction that many organisations miss: testing is just one task. It's the act of executing tests to find defects and ensure functionality works before release.

Quality assurance is something entirely different. It's a holistic process of preventing bugs and defects, improving collaboration, and embedding quality at every step from the very start.

This is where the "shift left" approach comes in. Shift left is a mindset that modern, mature Agile teams need to adopt.

It means involving QA early, from design discussions and requirements analysis. It means spotting potential issues before they become actual problems.

When testers are involved in requirement sessions and know the system well enough, they can identify what might not work. Catching defects at this stage is exponentially cheaper and faster than finding them in production.

The benefits extend beyond cost savings. You get continuous feedback loops, much better collaboration, and genuine shared accountability across the team.

The speed vs quality trap

Speed and quality are consistently the top two challenges I hear about. Developers are operating at the speed of light, with no time for unit testing anymore.

All the testing burden falls on testers, who need to test everything end-to-end. But here's the cruel irony: when deadlines get missed or scope changes, organisations always cut back on testing time, never on development.

Testing cycles get shorter and shorter. Coverage gets smaller and smaller.

If you involve testers from the very start – working with BAs and developers throughout – by the time the requirement hits the formal testing phase, 70% of your testing has already been done. Testers know exactly what to look for and what to test.

This is a proactive quality approach, not reactive damage control.

Four steps to transform to Quality

So how do you actually make this shift? Based on conversations with clients across industries, here are four practical steps:

1. Eliminate silos

Make sure your roles work much closer together from the initial planning sessions and requirements gathering. Break down the walls between BAs, developers, and testers.

2. Foster Agile principles

I'm a strong believer in Agile principles for creating collaborative environments. Encourage people to talk and communicate regularly, not just log tickets in a tool.

If team members aren't allowed to speak to each other, you have a serious problem. Direct communication eliminates assumptions and ambiguity.

3. Get leadership buy-in

True transformation only happens when it comes from the top. Leaders need to promote a quality-first approach and lead by example.

Start small: involve QA in sprint planning, backlog refinement, and design sessions. Build from there.

4. Adopt shift left

Make shift left your default mindset. Bring testers into conversations earlier and earlier until it becomes second nature.

Back to basics

Here's what strikes me most about all these conversations: the solution isn't complex. It's actually about going back to basics.

Too often, organisations operating at pace start taking shortcuts. Documentation isn't done properly, tools aren't used effectively, communication drops, ceremonies get skipped.

These basics exist for a reason. If you keep them intact, they're time-savers, not time-wasters.

It comes down to management – leaders who empower their teams, provide frameworks to operate from, and let teams own the quality aspect with genuine accountability and responsibility. Most importantly, they don't rely on testing to be their quality control.

Think of it like construction. If your foundation isn't laid properly and you end up with skewed walls, you can't paint those walls straight – it simply won't work.

Requirements gathering from a BA perspective is your foundation. Development is your build. Quality assurance should be present in every single phase.

Testing then becomes the finishing touches, making sure everything operates according to plan and functions as intended. Not the last-ditch attempt to catch what everyone else missed.

The organisations that thrive are those that see BAs, developers, and testers not as separate functions, but as one unified team with a shared goal. That's when quality stops being a phase and becomes imbedded everywhere.