Blog

QA metrics for managers: defects and developers

When running these metrics pay special attention to the fact how long it took to fix the defect and which step was most intense.
25 October 2013
Quality assurance
Smiling man wearing glasses in a professional black-and-white headshot
Article by Dima Tish
Head of global business development at a1qa

In previous articles we discussed, how to define the quality rate, evaluate testers` capacity and covered bug description method. All these things concerned tester`s work, but a tester is the one who detects a bug, while a developer fixes it. So this time I would like to cover some bits of a DEVELOPER`s niche on the QA consulting map. Taking bug statics as a basis, I want to tell about the indexes that reflect developer`s work efficiency.

First one is about defect lifecycle continuity. The index comprises “defect processing period”, “defect fixing period” and some other elements.

When running these metrics pay special attention to the fact how long it took to fix the defect and which step was most intense. Remember to track the index changes and put them in to the diagram, like this one, for example.

Defect lifecycle longevity

Defect lifecycle line chart showing MIN, AVG, and MAX weekly defect resolution times
Line chart titled Defect lifecycle shows weekly defect resolution times across 15 weeks with MIN near zero, AVG ranging about 120–560 hours, and MAX rising from roughly 600 to 1,440 hours, illustrating how fix duration trends reveal the most intensive stages

The method of data collection resembles the one I described in the first article of QA metrics for managers, when told about defects having status “functions as designed”.

When you start calculating, you`ll see that index increases due to the defect lifecycle longevity. Considerable can be observed on stages like processing, assigning and queuing.

Line chart titled % Rejected showing weekly defect rejection rates rising to 0,47 by Week 14
Line chart titled “% Rejected” shows weekly defect rejection rates from Week 01 to Week 15, rising from 0.06 to peaks of 0.40 and 0.47 before dropping to 0.10, illustrating how lifecycle delays increase rejected-status share

The other one index is the percentage of Rejected bugs. Defect is considered to be rejected, when a tester gives it status of a non-fixed one after checking. That means that a cycle has to be renewed: report to a developer, re-fix, re-check. The time is actually wasted for additional communication. On large scale projects such things cause additional expenditures, which is quite tangible.

Having exercised multiple projects, I noticed that 10% is an acceptable value for the index; try to keep to that limit. It is better to calculate the index after every release, especially on a large scale project, when more than two builds is released per week.

Remember to add the index in every report, to keep the tester and developer teams informed. Doing this you stimulate the team members to bring down the index percentage and define the positive work dynamics.

More Posts

27 July 2026,
by AI Engineering Lab
5 min read
How thorough testing helps protect the reputation of AI-driven products
Would you trust a compass that points in the wrong direction once in a while? AI products are no different. Every unreliable output can lead to user churn. Learn how timely QA can help you avoid these risks.
Quality assurance
16 July 2026,
by Automation Lab
6 min read
Super app testing: How QA keeps complex platforms reliable
Super apps bring payments, shopping, bookings, messaging, and support into one place. Explore how scalable QA keeps every service, integration, and customer journey working together.
Mobile app testing
Quality assurance
Test automation
11 June 2026,
by Lena Yakimova
6 min read
Why quality assurance is critical for customer experience and customer retention
Even small product issues can push customers away. Comprehensive quality control ensures those moments never happen, making it one of the most powerful drivers of retention.
Quality assurance
Usability testing
12 May 2026,
by Mike Urbanovich
6 min read
QA vs QE: How to transition to quality engineering in the age of AI
Quality is no longer something you test into a product. The organizations that understand this are already pulling ahead.
Functional testing
Quality assurance
Test automation
5 May 2026,
by Vitaly Prus
5 min read
How to ensure high software quality that keeps up with Agile speed
Let’s dive into how project teams can combine modern QA practices to ensure that quality keeps pace with rapid development requirements.
Agile
Quality assurance
21 April 2026,
by Automation Lab
5 min read
Modern Selenium Grid alternatives: Playwright, Cypress, and Selenoid in 2026
Teams choosing an automation stack in 2026 need to weigh legacy code, infrastructure load, and the speed of feedback. This article helps them choose between Selenium Grid, Selenoid, Playwright, and Cypress.
Quality assurance
Test automation
17 March 2026,
by Pavel Novik
5 min read
How to build a quality culture that strengthens digital transformation
Quality culture builds trust, improves delivery, and drives transformation success. Keep reading to learn why businesses need to treat quality as a core discipline and how this blog covers everything from vision to training, metrics, and ongoing improvement.
Quality assurance
13 February 2026,
by Lena Yakimova
6 min read
ROI and TCO in QA: How testing helps companies earn more and spend less
Learn how to quantify the true business value of testing and align your quality strategy with the bottom-line goals that matter to the C-suite.
Quality assurance
Test automation
30 January 2026,
by AI Engineering Lab
5 min read
Strategic QA: The foundation of digital transformation
Digital transformation moves fast. Discover how modern QA helps you deliver change at speed by identifying high-stakes risks before they impact your reputation or your bottom line.
Cybersecurity testing
Functional testing
Performance testing
Quality assurance
Usability testing

Get in touch

Please fill in the required field.
Email address seems invalid.
Please fill in the required field.
We use cookies on our website to improve its functionality and to enhance your user experience. We also use cookies for analytics. If you continue to browse this website, we will assume you agree that we can place cookies on your device. For more details, please read our Privacy and Cookies Policy.