goGreenlit
A process your team follows without being told to

QA process design that builds quality into every sprint

A missing QA process doesn't look like chaos, it looks like the same argument about whether something's ready to ship, every single release. GoGreenlit designs sprint-level testing process, defect triage, and release criteria around how your team actually works.

Signals your QA process needs a redesign

None of these look like a crisis day to day. Together, they’re usually the reason quality feels inconsistent release to release.

  • Testing starts after development is “done,” so every defect found is already expensive to fix
  • Defects get triaged inconsistently, so release decisions depend on who's in the room
  • Nobody can point to written entry or exit criteria for a sprint or a release
  • QA finds out about a feature in the same standup as everyone else, not during planning
  • Test documentation describes a version of the product that shipped two quarters ago

What shapes the process we design

A process copied from another company fits that company. Yours gets designed around these four factors instead.

Sprint length

A one-week sprint needs a tighter testing loop than a three-week one, the process has to fit the cadence, not fight it.

Team composition

How many developers, how many dedicated testers, and how much testing responsibility developers already carry.

Application architecture

A monolith and a microservices architecture fail in different places, and the process should watch the places yours actually fails.

Organizational risk profile

A fintech release and an internal tool have very different tolerances for what “good enough” means.

Getting the whole team aligned on the new process

  1. 1

    Team walkthrough

    A working session presenting the new process to engineering, not a document dropped in Slack.

  2. 2

    One-sprint pilot

    The process runs for a single sprint before it's treated as final, so friction points surface while they're still cheap to fix.

  3. 3

    Retrospective review

    A dedicated retro on the process itself, adjustments get made based on what the pilot sprint actually surfaced.

What good process documentation looks like

Short, specific, and actionable, four documents instead of one binder nobody opens.

Sprint QA runbook

What gets tested, when, and by whom, for a single sprint cycle.

Defect report template

A consistent format for severity, reproduction steps, and triage ownership.

Release checklist

Explicit entry and exit criteria, so a go or no-go decision doesn't depend on who's in the room.

Coverage report template

A running record of what got tested each sprint, and what didn't.

Frequently asked questions

Ready for a QA process your team will actually follow?

Tell us what breaks down most often: missed defects, inconsistent releases, unclear ownership. We'll scope a process design engagement in one call.