CTFL_Syll2018 Exam Dumps : ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (Syllabus 2018)

Percentage of work done in test environment preparation is a metric that measures how much of the required test environment setup has been completed. This metric is useful for monitoring the test progress because it indicates whether the test environment is ready for executing the planned test cases or not.

The correct answer is A, as it states that the Wideband Delphi estimation technique is an example of the expert-based approach. The Wideband Delphi estimation technique is a method of estimating testing effort or duration by using a structured group process that involves multiple experts2. The experts provide their estimates independently and anonymously, then compare and discuss them until they reach a consensus2. This technique is an example of the expert-based approach, which is an approach that relies on the knowledge and experience of experts to estimate testing activities2. Option B is incorrect, as it states that the Wideband Delphi estimation technique is an example of the metrics-based approach. The metrics-based approach is an approach that uses historical data and mathematical formulas to estimate testing activities2. This approach does not involve experts or group processes. Option C is incorrect, as it states that burndown charts used in Agile development is an example of the expert-based approach. Burndown charts are graphical tools that show the amount of work remaining versus time in an Agile project2. They are used to monitor and control testing progress and quality. They are not examples of the expert-based approach, as they do not rely on experts’ opinions or estimates. Option D is incorrect, as it states that burndown charts used in Agile development is an example of the risk-based approach. The risk-based approach is an approach that uses risk analysis to prioritize and estimate testing activities2. This approach involves identifying and assessing risks based on their likelihood and impact. It does not involve burndown charts or Agile development. References: 2, Section 2.6

Managing the incidents in a spreadsheet posted on the intranet is the best option for a QA manager of a start-up company who needs to implement within a week a low cost incident management tool. A spreadsheet is a simple and flexible tool that can be used to record, track, and report incidents. Posting the spreadsheet on the intranet can make it accessible and visible to the relevant stakeholders. This option can be implemented quickly and cheaply, without requiring much training or maintenance3 suggests this as follows:

A spreadsheet is a common tool that can be used for incident management, especially for small or simple projects. A spreadsheet can be used to create an incident report template that includes the necessary information and fields for each incident. The spreadsheet can also be used to sort, filter, group, or analyze the incidents based on various criteria. The spreadsheet can be shared or published on a network or web location that can be accessed by the project team and other stakeholders.

A, C, and D are not good options for a QA manager of a start-up company who needs to implement within a week a low cost incident management tool. Managing the incidents through E-mails and phone calls (A) is not a good option, as it can be inefficient, unreliable, and inconsistent. E-mails and phone calls can be easily lost, overlooked, or forgotten, and they do not provide a centralized or structured way of recording, tracking, or reporting incidents. Purchasing and deploying an incident management tool © is not a good option, as it can be expensive, time-consuming, and complex. An incident management tool may require licensing fees, installation costs, configuration efforts, training sessions, and maintenance support. Documenting incidents on a large board in the lab (D) is not a good option, as it can be impractical, insecure, and incomplete. A large board in the lab may not have enough space or structure to document all the incidents in detail, and it may not be accessible or visible to all the stakeholders. A large board in the lab may also expose confidential or sensitive information to unauthorized people.