Setup QA Process
A QA process is not a document. It's the set of habits that decide what gets checked before your software reaches customers, and whether anyone can say 'this release is ready' with a straight face.
I've set these up inside teams and I'll tell you where they actually fail: not in the strategy deck, but in week three, when a deadline arrives and the process quietly gets skipped. So we build processes designed to survive deadline pressure, which means starting smaller than most consultancies would like you to. A written checklist of your critical journeys. A shared definition of what blocks a release and what doesn't. One place where bugs live, with reproduction steps. That skeleton, followed honestly, beats an elaborate process followed occasionally.
The severity rules matter more than they sound. Without them, every bug becomes a negotiation two days before launch, and the loudest voice wins. With them, a cosmetic defect can't block a release and a broken payment flow can't be argued into 'known issue'. We'll help you agree those rules while nobody is under pressure, which is the only time they can be agreed fairly.
Then we scope testing by risk, not by habit. A release that touches auth or payment gets the full pack; a copy change doesn't. Teams end up scheduling releases around what QA has had time to test precisely because everything arrives at once with equal priority, and the fix is structural: test features as they merge, keep a regression pack ranked by what the release actually touched, and reserve human exploratory time for what's new.
Tools come last, deliberately. Your existing tracker, Jira, Linear or GitHub Issues, is almost certainly fine. Test cases can start in a structured document and graduate to TestRail when volume justifies it; automation starts after the manual process has proved which checks are stable enough to script. A tool bought before the process exists becomes shelfware with a subscription.
What you get from us is the working system plus the handover: severity definitions, checklist templates, bug report standards your developers won't resent, and a few release cycles of support while it beds in. A process only becomes real the first time it's followed under pressure, and we stay around for that part.
Scoping
Define the scope of the QA process, including which types of testing will be included and which stakeholders will be involved.
Standards
Set standards and guidelines for testing, how defects should be reported and tracked, and how test results should be documented.
Infrastructure
Set up the necessary tools and infrastructure for testing, including test environments, test data, and test management software.
Monitor and improve
Regularly review and assess the QA process to identify any areas for improvement and make necessary changes.
Frequently asked questions
How do I set up a QA process at a startup from scratch?
Start smaller than you think: a written checklist of your critical user journeys, a definition of what blocks a release and what doesn't, and one place where bugs live with reproduction steps. Run that for a few releases before buying tools or hiring. The goal of a first QA process is that nothing important ships untested by accident, not that everything is tested exhaustively.
Do we need a QA process if we're only five people?
You need a checklist, not a department. A five-person team with weekly releases is usually well served by one page of release checks, an hour of structured exploratory testing per release, and a founder who reads crash reports. Formal process earns its keep when the checklist no longer fits in one head. We'll tell you honestly if you're not there yet.
How do we stop QA being a bottleneck before releases?
Move testing earlier and rank it by risk. Teams end up scheduling releases around what QA has had time to test because everything lands on QA at once, in the final week, with equal priority. The fix is testing features as they merge rather than at the end, a regression pack scoped to what changed, and agreed severity rules so a cosmetic bug can't block a launch.
Which testing tools do we need to start?
Fewer than the tooling industry suggests. A bug tracker you already have (Jira, Linear or GitHub Issues), somewhere to write test cases (TestRail or a structured document), and later an automation framework such as Playwright for web or Appium for mobile. Tools last, process first: a tool bought before the process exists becomes shelfware with a subscription.
How long does it take to set up a working QA process?
A usable first version takes days: journeys mapped, checklist written, severity rules agreed. Making it stick takes a few release cycles, because a process only becomes real the first time it's followed under deadline pressure. Expect to adjust it after each of the first few releases; a QA process that never changes is one nobody is using.
Ready to improve your software quality?
Tell us about your product and we'll get back to you with a plan.
Contact Us