Similarly, only a rare Latvian public ICT system is undergoing additional safety tests - all Latvia

Currently, up to 90% of public funding for developing an ICT system operation will be accepted without the formalized testing - testing. Such an attitude can be characterized as frivolous, given the damage caused by undetected errors can cause the population and the economy as a whole. ICT system testing - on paper or formal
Software Quality Competence Centre "SQUALIO" Experts say, however, that the Latvian up to 90% of public funding for developing an ICT system operation will be accepted without the formalized testing - testing. It may be entrusted to consultants who are well done, but unfortunately, these consultants often themselves by the procurement documentation or mostly they do not test or specialist tools required nor qualified to carry out the test.
The most common system of testing is the same developer and Customer Authority staff on duty. Customer, while, on the one hand, knowledge of the system of processes, but employees do not have the necessary skills for testing large-scale systems, as well as lack of time or opportunity to carry out any test automation.
The situation could be compared with the example of the financial world - larger companies annual verification to invite the experts - auditors or auditors. This obligation is not the same in terms of financial professionals. While ICT system testing, this step is omitted, and as a result they are accepted into a large number of errors, the repair 1111 of production conditions are prolonged, costly and have an adverse impact on the users of the system. Customer has received the dubious quality product that further correction of errors shall be paid in addition to the funds.
An example of the consequences if the system is formally tested or not tested at all, there are many Latvian. If the State Revenue Service's quality system should be tested and corrected all the errors, the so-called Neo would not be the case because 1111 they have no access to system failure 1111 information.
While the Central Statistical Bureau of the electronic population census errors allowed the system to any user without extensive prior knowledge gaps in ICT access personal data and the information submitted. 1111 The system fails the load test
Very few of the Latvian public funding for ICT-designed system is performance testing - for example, by checking how many users at the same time the system can operate. Thus, the contract documentation specified performance requirements actually be fictitious - for their performance largely belief or supplier (as it used to control the technical infrastructure, which will include system) nor the customer.
For this reason, the mass media have surfaced at cases where an institution's system is running too slow or even cease to function when they are put to much larger number of users.
Similarly, only a rare Latvian public ICT system is undergoing additional safety tests - all Latvian public systems are made formally safety tests, meeting the minimum testing program. But here we speak only the minimum requirements, without assessing the actual system requirements and user needs. System testing should be mandatory
This year, the completion of the European Regional 1111 Development Fund (ERDF) absorption period (2007 to 2013)., Which unfortunately is characterized on the resources allocated to developing an ICT system for non-compliance with the objectives, failures, costly rectification and commissioning of a purely formal.
I believe that a requirement for high-quality ICT systems testing prior to its formal and material transfer for casual users is the only way to avoid the consequences of error, saving substantial amounts of resources.
Latvian ICT industry has developed and experts capable of offering high quality innovative solutions for domestic and export markets, and therefore unable to resolve the ICT system testing, the national institutional level is a paradox that should be removed as readily accessible.
Spike can not be gainsaid - Testing by the customer is dramatically 1111 low. The most I have seen cases that the system is adopted Acceptance, down time "tested", accepted, but logfailos few posts :) Testing Laboratory government systems would be a public 1111 benefit. Doubts as Pastor of the laboratory "independence", or in case we do not use it as a weapon in competition 1111 as an option to exclude 1111 unwanted calls from suppliers. As well as this article, however, ranks advertorial category and is alleged that, see if we have all tested, that nothing 1111 (with SRS