From Blocker to Minor: Understanding Defect Severity and SLAs

Defect Severity: Why Every Bug Matters

?? In the world of software development, not all defects are created equal. Some bring an entire application to its knees, while others are minor inconveniences. But does that mean we should delay fixing lower-severity defects? What are the consequences of letting defects linger? Let's explore how teams categorize defects and define SLAs to ensure timely resolutions.

We’ve previously discussed What is a Software Regression?, Does Severity Matter for Regression Defects?, and Escapes: When Defects Slip Through the Cracks. Now, let’s examine how defects are classified and prioritized for resolution.

Defining Defect Severities ??

The SLA Commitment ?

Severity determines urgency, but SLA compliance ensures accountability. Here’s the priority framework:

• Blocker & Critical: Must be fixed in the current release or patched.
• Major: Fixed in next release, unless it’s a regression.
• Minor: Addressed in upcoming releases, based on priority.

Why Every Defect Matters ??

Even seemingly "minor" defects can chip away at customer trust over time. What happens when users repeatedly encounter UI glitches, misleading labels, or inconsistent experiences? It damages confidence in the product.

?? "Quality means doing it right when no one is looking." – Henry Ford

Up Next: Mission Statement for Software Development Teams ??

We’ve covered regressions, escapes, and defect prioritization. But what is the ultimate mission of a software development team? How do teams align around quality, innovation, and customer trust? Stay tuned for our next discussion!

?? What’s your take? Have you experienced the impact of different defect severities? How does your team prioritize fixes? Drop your thoughts in the comments! ??