Reference no: EM13255407
JD Berensen (hereafter ‘JD'), an experienced and well-respected consultant, was contracted as a test consultant to a client, to provide testing and quality assurance services on an eCommerce project.
At the beginning, there was a testing manager, George Bromley (hereafter George), JD as team lead, and two test analysts, one of them on loan from the vendor. George had hired the two test analysts and JD for the project.
The system under test had a web browser front end, with an interface through which customers could lodge orders which would then be passed to a SAP backend for order fulfilment and order transfer to 3rd party vendors. At first, the testing effort seemed to have a manageable scope, but as the team got further into the task they found the complexity increasing substantially.
Four weeks after JD started, George unexpectedly quit, leaving the project due to budget constraints. The rest of the team were confused and slightly alarmed. What was going on? Questions were asked as to who would take over George's responsibilities. JD took it upon himself to ensure that a fully tested system was delivered to the business, and so he put himself forward as George's replacement. Senior management approved the appointment. JD primarily wanted to ensure the project was a success, but he also saw this as an opportunity to further his own career through performing this more senior role.
After a week in his new role, JD became aware that the two test analysts hired by George were not up to the task of performing the testing preparation needed for such a complex system (writing the test cases). Jerry, the test analyst from the vendor, was initially brought in to handle the SAP functionality testing component. Jerry told JD that he didn't actually know very much about SAP, and did not want the responsibility of writing the SAP test cases. A few weeks later JD found out that George and Jerry had previously worked on a project together for the client, and that George was fostering relationships with the vendor by hiring its consultants for testing roles within the client's IT projects.
As for the other test analyst, Phillipa, this was the first time that she had lived and worked overseas, so she was still finding her way in a new work and social environment.
As a result of these limitations, both test analysts needed a much more time than usual to write the test cases, because they were having difficulty comprehending the requirements and functional specifications, although JD had held workshops to assist in their preparation. When the difficulties in performing basic test preparation became apparent, JD asked both analysts about their previous testing experiences. He found that Jerry had only two years' experience, while Phillipa had only one years' experience in testing, and she had no previous Telecommunications experience.
Issues came to a head when Jerry could not meet the deadlines for his test cases, although he had been given the easiest cases to write. JD, and his boss the overall project manager, felt that Jerry was more of a hindrance than a help to the team and, noting that he was an expensive vendor resource, they made the decision that Jerry's services were no longer required. Jerry was not however fired though. With his Purchase Order soon expiring (no more money to pay him with), he would simply serve out the rest of his time doing very little besides surfing the internet in his cubicle.
Jerry, not surprisingly was most unhappy about this and became confrontational in two closed meetings with JD, who considered Jerry's behaviour to be unprofessional. These incidents, coupled with Jerry's poor work deliverables, prompted JD to ask the vendor to be involved in a performance review so both the vendor and Jerry could benefit from objective feedback.
George was no longer on the project, and he had not had any formal or informal business contact with JD for at least 5 weeks. However, George, in a closed meeting, asked JD to retract his request for a performance review, as he, George, said that he might want to re-hire Jerry for future projects.
He asked JD to email the vendor saying that he would not require a performance review for Jerry, and that there were no issues with Jerry's performance. JD did neither.
Not long after this incident the project was placed on hold by the client. The project scope had crept alarmingly to the point where it was considered that delivery by the required date would be impossible. An internal audit was conducted to investigate the reasons for the project slippage.
When the project was halted the test team was immediately released as their services were not needed for the time being. JD was approached by another senior testing manager, Ben, to come work on a project that would be for approximately 9 months. An interview was arranged with Ben, JD and the client business sponsor. The day before the interview Ben rang JD to say that the interview was cancelled and that JD would not be considered because Ben had received a bad review of JD. Ben didn't say who had said this, but JD later found out from a reliable source that it was George.
Attachment:- Assignment.rar