2. Principles of Quality Engineering: How Quality Is Truly Built

Quality Engineering Is Primarily a Mindset Shift

Quality Engineering is not just about how we test. It is about how we think about quality.

Who is truly responsible for it?
When do we start building it?
What does “quality software” actually mean to us?

In practice, there is often a mistaken expectation that somewhere there is a correct set of steps that will automatically lead to high-quality software. In Quality Engineering, no such universal recipe exists. That is an intention.

Quality Engineering is built on principles, not rigid rules. These principles can be applied across different contexts, organizations, and project types. What works in a small agile team will look different from what works in a large corporate environment shaped by legacy processes, dependencies, and regulations.

Quality Engineering does not provide ready-made answers. Instead, it helps teams ask the right questions:
When do we discover that we have a problem?
How quickly can we respond?
What can we change to prevent the same issue from happening again?

This shift in mindset is what allows Quality Engineering to succeed long-term, especially in environments where mechanically implementing processes often fails. The goal is not to “do QE correctly,” but to build quality consciously, systematically, and collaboratively.

Many Defects Originate Long Before Testing

One of the most common illusions in software development is the belief that quality can be “caught up” during testing. In reality, experience shows that many problems originate long before the first line of code is written.

Defects often arise when the team lacks clarity about what is being built, why a feature exists, and what real value it should deliver.

Unclear requirements, missing context, or differing interpretations lead to decisions that are difficult and costly to reverse later. The cost of change increases significantly over time. Quality Engineering addresses this by shifting attention back to the earliest stages of development where change is still relatively inexpensive.

Open discussion, shared understanding of goals, and early risk identification often have a greater impact on quality than any number of test cases. Quality Engineering does not diminish the importance of testing; it strengthens it by supporting earlier phases of the lifecycle.

Quality as a Shared Responsibility

One of the most significant shifts introduced by Quality Engineering is the change in how responsibility for quality is perceived. Traditionally, quality is associated with testers and the testing phase. When a production issue occurs, the immediate question is often: why wasn’t it detected earlier?

Quality Engineering challenges this perspective. Quality is no longer the responsibility of a single role; it becomes a shared commitment across the entire team. Every team member directly influences the outcome (defining requirements, designing solutions, or implementing code). This approach fosters more open communication and reduces the tendency to look for someone to blame instead of focusing on solutions.

Continuous Feedback Instead of a Final Verdict

Traditional approaches to quality often rely on a single major control point shortly before release, or worse, feedback that only comes from production incidents. In practice, this means teams operate for long periods without clear insight into the true state of the product. When a critical issue is discovered late, it is often complex and expensive to fix.

Quality Engineering changes this by embedding continuous feedback throughout the lifecycle. Information about quality should flow constantly (during solution design, development, and after deployment).

In practice, this may include:

• Close collaboration between business, development, and testing during requirement definition
• Automated tests running with every code change
• Code reviews as a standard part of daily work
• Continuous monitoring in production with rapid response to anomalies

This is not only about tests themselves. It is about creating an information flow that enables the team to adjust direction early and prevent quality degradation.

Continuous feedback ensures that small issues are addressed before they grow into significant risks. Teams avoid crisis mode, and poor quality stops being an unpleasant surprise at the end of the project.

Continuous Improvement as a Natural Part of Work

Quality Engineering does not focus solely on the current release. Equally important is the ability to learn from past mistakes and continuously improve the way the team works. If similar issues repeatedly occur in a project, it is a clear signal that their root cause has not been addressed.

Quality Engineering promotes a systemic approach to analyzing defects. Instead of applying quick fixes, teams ask: Why did this happen? What decision led to it? What needs to change to prevent recurrence? Continuous improvement also includes the ongoing development of people. Education, cross-role knowledge sharing, and expanding competencies help teams better understand the broader context and avoid repeating the same mistakes.

Over time, this approach increases team maturity and strengthens the stability of the entire development process.

Quality Engineering is not about how many tests we have. It is about how early we are able to recognize that we are heading in the wrong direction.

Summary of Part 2

• Quality Engineering is a set of principles and approaches, not a methodology.
• It addresses the root causes of defects originating in early development stages.
• Continuous feedback enables rapid response and provides real insight into product quality.
• Continuous improvement is a core principle of Quality Engineering.
• Quality is the responsibility of the entire team.

In the next part, we will explore the shift from Tester to Quality Engineer. What does a real transformation of role and collaboration within the team look like?