Problem solve Get help with specific problems with your technologies, process and projects.

Quality assurance testing vs. user acceptance testing

There are differences between quality assurance (QA) testing and user acceptance testing (UAT), but the two test teams ought to collaborate and work together to discover issues.

What is the difference between quality assurance testing and user acceptance testing?

The difference between quality assurance (QA) testing and user acceptance testing (UAT) varies across organizations and often within organizations. In general, UAT is usually the final testing process prior to deployment and is performed by a business tester who ultimately signs off on the product. The business tester attempts to execute relevant business scenarios to determine if the system as tested will satisfy the real-world business needs.

QA testing usually precedes UAT and is typically performed within the technology organization. QA testing examines the functional behavior of individual technology components and seeks to test their integrated feature-level capability. One of the constant challenges QA testing teams face is the wide variety of testing skills required to properly bridge technology testing with business testing. An effective QA test team is able to provide test at both a technical component level to enable early feedback, as well as at a scenario level to bridge with business users. One way to tackle that challenge is to develop a collaborative partnership with the business testing team that could consist of test development reviews, test data preparation, and paired test execution.

A summary of the typical differences between QA testing and UAT are as follows:  

Although some say there should be strict isolation between the QA testing teams and user acceptance testing teams, more often than not this only defers important feedback and reduces the overall testing capability. When possible a collaborative testing process usually yields more defects earlier in the process, thereby giving the development team sufficient time to implement a fix and submit for retest.

The surest way to kill a project is to view testing as a "phase" that belongs at the end of a project as opposed to an integrated part of the ongoing development process. Waiting until the very end to start testing (either QA testing or user acceptance testing) will create problems for even the simplest of projects. An iterative and collaborative QA testing/user acceptance testing process can be a powerful tool for discovering issues early and providing forecasting data that helps to guide the project to a successful deployment.  

More on this topic

Next Steps

How and why you should mix things up for your software testers

This was last published in October 2008

Dig Deeper on Software Usability Testing and User Acceptance

Have a question for an expert?

Please add a title for your question

Get answers from a TechTarget expert on whatever's puzzling you.

You will be able to add details on the next page.

Join the conversation


Send me notifications when other members comment.

By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Please create a username to comment.

Thank you for this great article, I found it very helpful.
@NZPM001, thanks for reading. I'm glad it helped you out. Are there any other questions you'd like our experts to answer?