home / skills / proffesor-for-testing / agentic-qe / consultancy-practices

consultancy-practices skill

/v3/assets/skills/consultancy-practices

This skill helps you apply consultancy practices to assess, prioritize, transfer knowledge, and measure success in software quality engagements.

npx playbooks add skill proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe --skill consultancy-practices

Review the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.

Files (1)
SKILL.md
6.3 KB
---
name: consultancy-practices
description: "Apply effective software quality consultancy practices. Use when consulting, advising clients, or establishing consultancy workflows."
category: professional-practice
priority: medium
tokenEstimate: 950
agents: [qe-quality-analyzer, qe-regression-risk-analyzer, qe-quality-gate]
implementation_status: optimized
optimization_version: 1.0
last_optimized: 2025-12-03
dependencies: []
quick_reference_card: true
tags: [consulting, advisory, client-engagement, quality-assessment, transformation]
---

# Consultancy Practices

<default_to_action>
When consulting on quality:
1. LISTEN FIRST: Understand their context before prescribing solutions
2. DISCOVER: What's the pain? What have they tried? What are constraints?
3. PRIORITIZE: Impact/effort matrix - high impact, low effort first
4. TRANSFER KNOWLEDGE: Leave them better, not dependent on you
5. MEASURE: Define success metrics upfront, track weekly

**Engagement Types:**
- **Assessment (1-4 weeks)**: Discover, analyze, recommend
- **Transformation (3-12 months)**: Implement new practices
- **Advisory (ongoing)**: Strategic guidance, course-correct
- **Crisis (1-4 weeks)**: Fix critical issues blocking production

**Key Questions:**
- "Walk me through your last deployment"
- "Tell me about a recent bug that escaped to production"
- "If you could fix one thing, what would it be?"
</default_to_action>

## Quick Reference Card

### The Consulting Process

| Phase | Duration | Goal | Deliverable |
|-------|----------|------|-------------|
| **Discovery** | Week 1-2 | Understand context | Interview notes, observations |
| **Analysis** | Week 2-3 | Identify root causes | Impact/effort matrix |
| **Recommendations** | Week 3-4 | Present findings | Report with roadmap |
| **Implementation** | Month 2-6+ | Execute changes | Working system, trained team |
| **Transition** | Final month | Ensure self-sufficiency | Handover docs |

### Impact/Effort Matrix

| Priority | What | Action |
|----------|------|--------|
| High Impact, Low Effort | Quick wins | Do first |
| High Impact, High Effort | Major initiatives | Plan carefully |
| Low Impact, Low Effort | Nice-to-haves | If time permits |
| Low Impact, High Effort | Distractions | Skip |

---

## Common Patterns

### "We Need Test Automation"

**What they say:** "We need test automation"
**What they mean:** "Manual testing is too slow/expensive"

**Discovery:** How long is regression? What's deployment frequency?

**Typical Finding:** They need faster feedback, not "automation"

**Recommendation:**
1. Unit tests for new code (TDD)
2. Smoke tests for critical paths
3. Keep exploratory for discovery
4. Build automation incrementally

### "Fix Our Quality Problem"

**What they say:** "We have too many bugs"
**What they mean:** "Something is broken but we don't know what"

**Discovery:** Where found? What types? When introduced?

**Typical Finding:** No test strategy, testing too late, poor feedback loops

**Recommendation:**
1. Shift testing left
2. Improve coverage on critical paths
3. Speed up CI/CD feedback
4. Better requirements/acceptance criteria

### "We Want to Scale Quality"

**What they say:** "Growing fast, quality can't keep up"
**What they mean:** "Can't hire enough QA fast enough"

**Discovery:** Current QA:Dev ratio? Where's QA spending time?

**Typical Finding:** QA is bottleneck - manual regression, gatekeeping

**Recommendation:**
1. Make QA strategic, not tactical
2. Developers own test automation
3. QA focuses on exploratory, risk analysis
4. Use agentic approaches for scale

---

## Anti-Patterns

| Anti-Pattern | Problem | Better |
|--------------|---------|--------|
| **Cookie-Cutter** | Same solution everywhere | Context-specific recommendations |
| **Tool Pusher** | Recommend expensive tools | Tools that solve actual problems |
| **Process Nazi** | Impose rigid process | Lightweight, fits their culture |
| **Permanent Fixture** | Never leave, create dependency | Work toward them not needing you |
| **Blame Game** | Point fingers at people | Fix systems, not blame people |

---

## Difficult Situations

**"We already tried that"**
→ "Tell me what you tried and what didn't work" (learn from their experience)

**"Our context is special"**
→ "Help me understand what makes yours special" (they might be right, or making excuses)

**"We don't have budget/time"**
→ "What's the cost of not fixing this? Let's start small" (show ROI)

**"That won't work here"**
→ "What specific constraints? Let's adapt" (find what WILL work)

---

## Agent Integration

```typescript
// Automated codebase assessment
const assessment = await Task("Assess Codebase", {
  scope: 'client-project/',
  depth: 'comprehensive',
  reportFormat: 'executive-summary'
}, "qe-quality-analyzer");

// Returns: { qualityScore, testCoverage, technicalDebt, recommendations }

// ROI analysis for quality initiatives
const roi = await Task("Calculate ROI", {
  currentState: { defectEscapeRate: 0.15, mttr: 48 },
  proposedImprovements: ['test-automation', 'ci-cd-pipeline'],
  timeframe: '6-months'
}, "qe-quality-analyzer");

// Returns: { estimatedCost, estimatedSavings, paybackPeriod }
```

---

## Agent Coordination Hints

### Memory Namespace
```
aqe/consultancy/
├── assessments/*      - Client assessments
├── recommendations/*  - Prioritized recommendations
├── roi-analysis/*     - ROI calculations
└── progress/*         - Implementation tracking
```

### Fleet Coordination
```typescript
const consultingFleet = await FleetManager.coordinate({
  strategy: 'client-engagement',
  agents: [
    'qe-quality-analyzer',          // Assess current state
    'qe-regression-risk-analyzer',  // Risk assessment
    'qe-quality-gate',              // Define quality gates
    'qe-deployment-readiness'       // Deployment maturity
  ],
  topology: 'hierarchical'
});
```

---

## Related Skills
- [quality-metrics](../quality-metrics/) - Metrics for client reporting
- [risk-based-testing](../risk-based-testing/) - Client risk assessment
- [holistic-testing-pact](../holistic-testing-pact/) - Comprehensive strategy

---

## Remember

**Good consulting is about empowering teams, not creating dependency.** Your success is measured by them not needing you anymore - while still wanting to work with you again.

**Best compliment:** "We've got this now, but when we tackle X next year, we're calling you."

Be honest. Be helpful. Be context-driven. Leave them better.

Overview

This skill captures proven software quality consultancy practices to guide assessments, transformations, advisory engagements, and crisis responses. It frames a practical process—listen, discover, prioritize, transfer knowledge, and measure—to drive measurable improvements in product quality and team capability. Use it to structure short audits, long-term transformations, or ongoing advisory work with clear deliverables and success metrics.

How this skill works

The skill inspects client context, existing processes, and technical signals (deployments, defect escapes, CI feedback loops) to identify root causes and prioritize interventions. It produces concrete outputs: interview notes, impact/effort matrices, a recommendations roadmap, implementation plans, and handover documentation. The approach emphasizes quick wins, measurable outcomes, and knowledge transfer so teams become self-sufficient.

When to use it

  • Initial assessment of quality posture (1–4 weeks) to discover gaps and risks
  • Transformation programs (3–12 months) to implement new testing and delivery practices
  • Ongoing advisory engagements for strategic course-correction and governance
  • Crisis engagements (1–4 weeks) to unblock production issues and reduce time-to-recovery
  • When prioritizing initiatives using impact vs effort to focus limited resources

Best practices

  • Listen before prescribing—capture constraints, past attempts, and real pain points
  • Start with high-impact, low-effort wins to build momentum and trust
  • Define success metrics up front and track progress frequently (weekly where possible)
  • Design recommendations to transfer knowledge and reduce client dependence
  • Avoid cookie-cutter solutions; adapt tools and processes to the client’s culture

Example use cases

  • Run a 2-week discovery to map deployment cadence, defect escapes, and test strategy
  • Deliver a prioritized roadmap with impact/effort matrix and a 3-month implementation plan
  • Help a team shift testing left by introducing unit-led practices, smoke tests, and faster CI feedback
  • Lead a crisis engagement to stabilize production, reduce MTTR, and implement temporary quality gates
  • Conduct ROI analysis to justify test automation and CI/CD investments over a 6-month horizon

FAQ

How do you choose which improvements to start with?

Prioritize high-impact, low-effort items identified in discovery; validate with stakeholders and measure outcomes to justify larger investments.

What deliverables will the client receive?

Interview notes, impact/effort matrix, recommendations report with roadmap, implementation artifacts, and handover documentation for sustained capability.

How do you avoid creating dependency on consultants?

Embed knowledge transfer in every phase, train staff, document decisions, and time-box consultant involvement toward a formal transition.