A structured QA maturity assessment for organisations that want testing to improve deliberately, not by accident. PinnacleQM baselines where you are, agrees where you should be and maps how to get there.
30+years of international
IT experience
Without a clear view of current testing maturity, improvement initiatives compete for attention, investment goes to the loudest problem, and nobody can show whether quality is actually getting better year on year. Budgets go unchallenged.
PinnacleQM's INsight assessment measures maturity across people, process, technology, data and governance. We define an AS IS baseline, a TO BE target and a HOW TO roadmap with strategic and tactical tracks over five years.
A maturity assessment turns vague improvement goals into a baseline, a target and a sequenced plan, with measures that show progress to leadership.
A five-year roadmap, reviewed quarterly.
Maturity is measured against defined criteria, so the starting point is agreed rather than argued.
TO BE targets reflect your risk appetite, budget and delivery model, not an abstract ideal. They also reflect your delivery model.
Strategic and tactical tracks balance long-term capability with quick, visible wins. Leaders see early benefits while the larger changes take shape.
Initiatives are sequenced by value and dependency, each with an owner, a cost and a benefit.
Quarterly reviews re-measure maturity so leaders can see improvement over time. Progress is visible in scores rather than status updates alone.
Workshops involve your teams, so the roadmap is owned rather than imposed. People commit to changes they helped design.
The assessment covers every dimension that determines how well testing protects your business.
We assess team structures, roles, skills and certification against delivery needs, and identify capability gaps across testing, automation, performance, security and business acceptance. We also look at how knowledge is shared and retained across teams.
We review test planning, design, execution, defect management and reporting against ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119 and ISTQB practice, and how consistently processes are applied across teams. Gaps are ranked by their effect on quality and cost.
We assess test management, automation, performance and pipeline tooling, including automation coverage, reliability and maintenance effort. We look at tool integration, licensing and where tools overlap or leave gaps. Findings show where tooling is holding teams back.
We evaluate environment stability and availability, test data realism and protection, and the lead time for teams to get what they need, quantifying the delays and privacy risks each gap creates.
We review quality policy, governance forums, KPIs and release decision-making, and whether leaders get reliable evidence of quality and risk. We also review how decisions and residual risks are recorded and communicated.
We turn findings into a five-year roadmap with strategic and tactical tracks, sequenced initiatives, owners, costs and benefits, reviewed quarterly as maturity improves. Everyone can see what happens first and why.
The INsight method moves from evidence to a shared target and a practical roadmap your teams help build, so the plan is owned rather than imposed.
Assess current maturity through artefacts, metrics, workshops and interviews across teams. Evidence is scored consistently against each maturity dimension.
Agree TO BE maturity levels for each dimension with leadership and delivery teams.
Build the HOW TO roadmap with strategic and tactical tracks over five years.
Mobilise the first initiatives and quick wins with clear owners and measures.
Re-measure maturity quarterly and adjust the roadmap as priorities change. The roadmap evolves as your priorities and systems change.
A state transport department paying around $1 million a year in penalties had every defect tested, fixed and retested, and no longer incurs penalties.
Read more
A state health integration re-platforming was delivered by 7 testers in 12 months against competitor estimates of 40 to 46 testers over 36 months.
Read more
Enginuity as a service and a team of 12 replaced a 125-person offshore regression team across a Big 4 bank's end-to-end lending systems.
Read more
7 min read
Tools do not make releases faster by themselves. The practices, ownership and feedback loops that actually change cadence.
7 min read
What independence adds to testing on multi-vendor programmes, what it does not, and the signs a programme needs it.
7 min read
A practical way to decide which regression tests to automate, which to keep manual, and how to measure the return.
Tell us about your testing organisation and what you want to improve. We will outline an assessment scope, timeline and the roadmap you can expect at the end.
Mention team size, delivery model and your top improvement goals.
