02 — before or during the programme
Pod
Builds the pre-production capability that does not exist yet. You own the test code. It is not a residual team you inherit at the end.
Start Here
01 — fixed scope
A fixed-scope assessment of what regression costs across your live platforms, and where it is worth fixing.
02 — before or during the programme
Builds the pre-production capability that does not exist yet. You own the test code. It is not a residual team you inherit at the end.
03 — recurring
The recurring service both routes lead to. Named live journeys stay checked as the system changes, with a verdict from a named lead each cycle.
The evidence supports the claim.
It holds, and here is what is still exposed.
It ran. The evidence does not support the claim.
Outside this cycle’s scope. Not a finding either way.
Our aim is to put quality at the forefront of what we do as an organisation: making sure product delivery meets high standards and reduces risk for your customers.
Start with Map. It tells you what regression costs per platform and which journeys are worth covering, so you have the business case before you commit to anything ongoing. If the platform is live and you already know which journeys matter, say so on the first call — Cover may be the right door, and we will tell you either way. If it is a new programme and the pre-production capability does not exist yet, Map, then Pod, then Cover. We settle it on that first call, and if the fit is not there we say so on the same call.
A technical and commercial read on each platform: what regression costs, where it is worth fixing, the first six to eight journeys named, a draft scope register and a sequenced roadmap. It ends in a decision. That decision may be Cover, or Pod then Cover, or hire an engineer, or leave it alone, or decommission the platform anyway — and we will say so if that is what the numbers show.
No. You are buying a service with an output, not people to line-manage. What you get is the working automation and the capability to keep producing it after we leave. The test code is yours, in your repository, from the first commit.
No. Checks run in the agreed test environment or in CI, against builds and release candidates intended for production. Cover builds the suite for a live platform — it does not run against the live platform.
No. A named lead assesses the evidence each cycle and issues a verdict: verified, verified with residual risk, not verified, or not assessed. The release decision stays yours. We are telling you what the evidence says, not what to do about it.
Minimum access by default. Work runs in your environments, repos and tools wherever possible; NDAs are standard; access is limited to the project team and withdrawn at close. We do not ask for production credentials, and test data is agreed or synthetic.
Independent testing and tool sales are two separate lines. In a QA assessment we do not recommend a tool because we sell it, and if there is a commercial interest in the recommendation, we say so in writing before you decide.
Launch
We opened on 28 September. What we kept seeing in how QA is bought, and what we do instead.
Read the articlePerspective
Test execution is the visible part. What a buyer is actually paying for is someone who has seen the failure before.
Read the articleGuide
Preparing a QA team for AI without losing the thing you were buying: what to ask of a tool, and where judgement still has to sit.
Read the articlePractice
A pass rate is not evidence. What a release decision needs, and why it has to arrive while the work is happening.
Read the article
Start here
If the fit is not there, we say so on the same call.
Careers
When there is a QA role, we hire dedicated software and AI enthusiasts who are looking to join a company that wants to make a difference.
Write to info@saucinco.com and attach your resume.