Software Testing & QA
Every release carries risk. Structured testing — manual where judgement matters, automated where repetition does — reduces how much of that risk reaches customers.
Functional, regression, cross-browser and API testing, with automation where it holds up over time.
The problem
A bug caught during development is usually a quick fix. The same bug found by a customer after release involves support time, a rushed hotfix, and — depending on where it sits — a failed transaction or lost trust. The gap between those two outcomes is usually a testing process that either didn't exist or didn't cover the path that broke.
Many teams test manually and informally, right before a release — which works until the release gets rushed, the person who usually checks things is unavailable, or the application has grown too large to click through by hand in the time available. That's typically the point where structured testing, and some amount of automation, starts to earn its cost back.
This isn't an argument for testing everything exhaustively regardless of cost. It's an argument for being deliberate about what gets tested, how, and how often — rather than leaving it to whoever has time right before a deadline.
Not a replacement for each other
Exploratory testing, usability judgement, and checking anything genuinely new still benefit from a person using the application the way a customer would — automation can't yet replicate that kind of judgement, and it isn't worth trying to force it to.
Repetitive checks — does login still work, does the checkout flow still complete, does the form still validate correctly — are exactly what automated tests are suited to, especially once they need to run on every single change rather than occasionally, by hand.
The right mix depends on the application, not a fixed checklist applied to everything.
Confirms features behave as intended against the requirements they were built for.
Checks that existing functionality still works after a change, not just the new feature itself.
Automated flows that simulate a real user moving through the application, often built with Playwright.
Dedicated attention to the paths where a failure directly costs a conversion or a transaction.
Confirms users can only see and do what their role permits, and that access controls hold up correctly.
Verifies backend endpoints return correct responses and handle invalid input appropriately.
Checks that key pages and actions stay responsive under the kind of traffic the application actually sees.
An application that works perfectly in one browser on one device isn't fully tested.
Automation in practice
Automated tests are most useful when they run automatically — triggered on every pull request or deployment through a CI/CD pipeline, rather than manually kicked off when someone remembers. We set up test suites, commonly built with Playwright for browser-based end-to-end coverage, to run against each change, with results visible before code merges or deploys. This catches regressions close to when they're introduced, when they're cheapest to fix, rather than weeks later during a release cycle. Automated coverage is built up gradually, prioritising the flows that matter most — payment, authentication, core user journeys — rather than attempting full coverage of an application on day one. It's worth being clear that automation doesn't catch everything: visual issues, usability problems and anything genuinely novel still need a person to look at the application directly. Test suites also need maintenance of their own — a suite that nobody updates as the application changes slowly stops being trustworthy.
Tell us about the application and what's riskiest about this release, and we'll scope the testing that actually reduces that risk.
Delivery
01
Review current test coverage, if any, release process and the areas most likely to cause problems.
02
Agree what's covered by manual testing, what's automated, and which flows are the priority.
03
Write functional, regression and end-to-end tests, often using Playwright for browser-based flows.
04
Connect automated tests to CI/CD so they run on every relevant change.
05
Maintain and extend test coverage as the application changes, and support ad hoc releases as needed.
FAQ
No. Automated tests are reliable for repetitive, well-defined checks, but exploratory testing and usability judgement still need a person. We treat them as complementary rather than one replacing the other.
Playwright is a common choice for browser-based end-to-end testing, though the right tool depends on the application and what's already in place.
Both. We often start by assessing an existing application's current test coverage and risk areas before deciding where to add tests.
Usually the highest-risk, most-used flows first — authentication, checkout, core journeys — rather than attempting full coverage immediately. Coverage is built up over time.
No testing process catches everything. The aim is to reduce the number and severity of issues that reach customers, not to guarantee a defect-free release.
Yes, tests are generally integrated into the pipeline already in place rather than requiring a separate process.
Both are available. Some teams need a one-off assessment before a release, others want ongoing QA support as part of a regular release cycle.
Usually with the flows that would cause the most damage if they broke — authentication, payments, core journeys — rather than trying to cover the whole application at once. Coverage builds up from there.
Test code is typically added to your existing repository and pipeline, so your team can see, run and extend it directly rather than relying on a separate, external test suite.
Capabilities
Deeper detail on the underlying services this work draws on.
Related services
Related implementation paths that often sit alongside this work.
Custom Web Applications
Custom web applications — dashboards, portals, booking systems and internal tools — built and supported beyond initial launch.
Managed Application Services
Domain, hosting, deployment and ongoing maintenance for web applications, handled by one technical partner instead of several disconnected providers.
SaaS Modernisation
Modernise an ageing application and strengthen the infrastructure underneath it, without a full rebuild from scratch.
Tell us about your application and release process, and we'll scope a testing approach that fits the risk involved.
