How do you deal with risks and uncertainties in user acceptance testing?

In my experience having a heatmap on the entry criteria to the UAT phase is a useful tool to highlight and mitigate risks. It brings all key stakeholders onto the same page and actively involves key resources in mitigating risks. It also means having robust entry criteria agreed and approved early, normally at the test strategy approval phase. Early engagement (potentially 2 months before UAT execution start) is also key. The who, what and why of UAT has to be clearly articulated in order for a smooth UAT entry and execution. Status reporting and UAT boards are key mechanisms to ensure the business is engaged and available for the UAT phase.

Stakeholder engagement is the key to mitigation of risks not only in UAT phase but entire project/product lifecycle. Test Plan should be vetted with the RTM, reviewed with the stakeholders and appropriate budget and schedule management undertaken. System Integration testing is another key area which needs more focus

One of the major challenges or risk for Uat is the switch from testing to real end case scenario as a user. The horizon of uncertainty opens which can lead to an undiscovered critical defect which when released in production without fix may impact the user experience on the contrary this defect comes with a rework and estimation of the regressive impact of the new software build.

User Acceptance Testing (UAT) is crucial for project success, but potential risks must be managed. First, identify risks like user disengagement, incomplete testing, changing expectations, technical glitches, and limited resources. Next, assess and prioritize risks using a matrix, focusing on impact and likelihood. Assign risk owners to monitor and manage each risk, and create tailored mitigation strategies. Boost user engagement through workshops and surveys to mitigate disengagement risk. Optimize test cases with stakeholder collaboration to tackle incomplete testing.

We leverage AI and ML to enhance User Acceptance Testing (UAT) by automating test case generation, predicting potential issues, and ensuring comprehensive test coverage. These technologies enable smarter test scripts that adapt to changes, identify anomalies, and provide actionable insights, ultimately improving efficiency, accuracy, and the overall quality of the testing process.

I agree with the above, and what I have learned most over the years is the "plan" is more for me to think through it all; then communicating all the various pieces to stakeholder groups and getting buy-in is an entirely different process. It doesn't work well to just "send the plan" to everyone. Carefully crafted conversations and visuals are needed to get the right information to the right people, and at the right time. Without serious collaboration, buy-in, and co-creation on the UAT plan does not execute as planned!

An important part of the UAT plan is to document what will NOT be tested, and why. I have often encountered situations where a defect is discovered after go-live and business stakeholders start asking, "Why wasn't this tested?" Too late. Stakeholder should have signed off on UAT scope long before go-live. Also, the UAT plan should not be stagnant. Like everything else, it needs to evolve as business needs change throughout the lifecycle. Again, keep stakeholders involved and ensure you get their blessing.

Wow, this is one concise paragraph with A LOT in it that could use a book to explain the details. The biggest challenge in all of this from my experience is getting the team and users together to craft meaningful test scenarios and getting the users to (and helping them) actually run the tests and provide meaningful feedback to help the team prioritize what to fix/update.

Test cases need to reflect how the system will actually be used. Think "day-in-the-life" testing. This means using prod data (if it exists), and having real end-users do the testing. I also don't expect my end-users to stick to the script. Yes, they need to complete what is in scope, but I always give them time to wander around and be creative. Most of the time, that's where defects end up being discovered.

When it comes to managing risks and uncertainties in UAT, one of the key things I focus on is making sure the users actually engage in the testing and feel comfortable giving honest feedback. It’s not always easy to get users to test thoroughly, so I start by keeping the process simple and clear for them. I stay in regular contact, nudging them with reminders and being available to answer any questions they have, so they feel supported throughout.

When managing and controlling UAT changes, I focus on being organized and keeping communication clear. UAT can quickly go off track if changes aren't handled properly, so I work closely with stakeholders to make sure any requested changes are well-documented and aligned with project goals. I’ll gather feedback on the proposed change, assess its impact on testing timelines and resources, and prioritize accordingly.

First, you need to expect this is going to happen. A UAT plan, agreed to at the beginning of the project, won't be worth the bits and bytes it's made of by the time UAT starts. Have regular UAT scope reviews that account for changes. Make absolutely sure relevant stakeholders sign off on the changes, especially if something that previous was in-scope has been removed.

The UAT feedback loop is particularly important in Agile SDLCs. We use UAT feedback to populate our "smoke tests", run after every deployment to the QA/TEST environment. UAT feedback also helps get into the minds of end-users. Not even the assigned Business Analyst is going to understand the business process as well as the end-users who will be required to use the system day-to-day. Actively soliciting and incorporating end-user feedback into the entire testing scope helps eliminate the technical blindness dev/test teams often experience.

A UAT release should be treated as part of the Scrum process, where this is being followed and, as such, merits a retro activity with the stakeholders. This will ensure multiple things: - most importantly, that issues encountered can be reviewed to attempt ways to reduce these in future releases - allow stakeholders to discuss improvements to the process and attempt to streamline future testing aiming to find issues earlier in the development process - increase input from all parties to draw the team together and potentially improve communication and skill awareness for future release cycles It’s important to use the outcomes a UAT review provides to increase the potential of finding and resolving defects earlier in the dev-test process.

UAT is the most likely test phase to be cut when timelines get tight...and timelines always seem to be tight. RESIST! You will be far better off being late with user feedback than being on time without it. Remember, defects found in production are up to two orders of magnitude more expensive than when found early in the lifecycle.

One factor to consider is that in some cases a business analyst may never never had any contact, in any way, shape of form with an end-user. Their understanding is filtered through a persona or through business stakeholders, or other team members (e.g. a PO) who themselves may not interact with the system(s) as end-users, or may do so infrequently. For this reason, it is particularly important to include the best possible representation of end-users both in the preparation of the UAT and during UAT, and if possible to include various roles in UAT execution. In those cases

Sometimes you get end users who want to 'break the system' during UAT. UAT is not the time for breaking. Managing end user expectations is important. You need to remind them this is about making sure the application works for them. Defects will be found, it won't be perfect, but we already tried to break it. By the time you hit UAT there shouldn't be any surprises.

We must resist the temptation to sacrifice UAT as deadlines approach. Delivering a poor quality product on time may not satisfy customer needs. It is crucial to maintain good communications with our stakeholders as we strive to satisfy their needs.