Workday R4
Introduction to System Integration Test (SIT)
Training
October 2016
Table of Contents
Program Test Schedule and Status
Facility and Environment
Daily Agenda
Roles & Responsibilities
Defect Management Training
Access to Training Materials
-2-
Overall Test Phase Schedule
2016 27
2017 28
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Test Planning
6/20/16 – 8/30/16
Go-Live
SIT Prep SIT Execution
9/7/16 – 10/04/16 10/26/16 – 1/20/17
UAT Kick-Off
SIT Kick-Off
UAT Prep UAT Execution
3/20/17 – 4/10/17 –
4/7/17 5/18/17
Regression Prep Regression Execution
1/23/17 – 2/24/17 2/27/17 – 4/6/17
Performance Prep Performance Execution Performance Prep Performance
Cycle 1 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Execution
9/16 – 10/16 11/17 – 1/17 1/23/17 – Cycle 2
2/15/17 2/16/17 – 3/21/17
Test Planning ISR Test Prep/Execution
8/16 – 9/16 10/16/16 – 5/31/17
Payroll Costing
Compare
Execution
4/10/17 –
5/18/17
FDM Converter GAP App Delivery
8/1/16 – 1/23/17
PANDA FDM Validator
Integrations Delivery
Group 2 Group 1 Group 3 Group 9 Group 6 Group 7 / Group 8
11/2/15 – 3/11/17
Group 4 Group 10 Group 5
P2 Report Delivery SIT HCM & Reports UAT FIN & HCM
12/14/15 – 3/7/17
WD27 Planning WD27 Execution WD28 Planning WD28 Execution
6/2016 – 8/2016 8/2016 – 9/2016 12/2016 – 2/2017 2/2017 – 3/2017
-3-
Test Phases
System Integration Test (SIT)
November The process of testing all components of the application in a fully integrated testing environment that mimics the real
2016 world use, including the interaction with external systems. This will involve executing end to end processes including
all the potential sub-processes, integrations to and from external systems and reports that may be run during the
end to end process.
Performance Test
Regression Test (WD28 w/Financials)
Impacted Systems Remediation (ISR) Test
User Acceptance Test (UAT)
April
The process of completing the final validation of required business functions and flow of the system by end users
2017 based on business requirements. It is also an opportunity for the project to engage additional sets of end users in the
project prior to deployment and test the effectiveness of the training and documentation. UAT focuses on user
controlled test scenarios and will provide insights regarding the understanding from the user community whether or
not the system is built to specifications, training enables the user to be successful, and the end product provides
value.
-4-
Table of Contents
Program Test Schedule and Status
Facility and Environment
Daily Agenda
Roles & Responsibilities
Defect Management Training
Access to Training Materials
-5-
Test Facilities
Planning Staging Accommodations
Location Command Center Kitchen
Network / Power / Printer / Phone Training Center Bathroom
Huddle / Meeting locations Projector / Screen
Snacks and Water
Tables / Chairs
Command Center Music
Laptops
Communications Zones Skype
White / Black boards
Meeting Rooms 25 SP 1st floor
1) Financial Accounting / ISP / Payroll
Costing
2) Financial Management
3) HCM / Payroll
Lobby
4) Procure to Pay
5) Gifts
6) Assets / Non-Sponsored A/R
7) Integrations / Reports / Security
8) Sponsored Awards
Winchester Ave.
-6-
SIT Environment
https://impl.workday.com/yale2/d/home.htmld
Workday tenant, Yale2
Data as of August, 2016
July payroll closed
Security
Access via SSO for self
Testers have Proxy
Native login for testing
-7-
Table of Contents
Program Test Schedule and Status
Facility and Environment
Daily Agenda
Roles & Responsibilities
Defect Management Training
Access to Training Materials
-8-
Daily Routine
SIT Welcome and Kick-Off (Day 1 only)
Daily Morning Meeting Morning Meeting
Distribution of materials
Morning Overall test status
Briefing Blockers – existing and newly impacting
8:30AM – 9:00AM Current days execution schedule Test
Execution
Defect Triage Status
& Prep
Test Execution Test Scenario Execution
9:00AM – 5:00PM
Post execution activities
Enter manually submitted defects
Update execution status
Daily Status & Run daily metrics reports
Next Day Prep Develop and distribute daily status
Prepare agenda for next morning meeting
Prepare defect triage report
------------------------- Rinse and Repeat -----------------------
-9-
Management
Progress
Morning Briefing
Sub-Team leads will meet with QA every morning to review current progress against the program schedule. Tactical plans will be discussed to resolve delays or prepare for
escalation and support. QA and Sub-Team leads will pro-actively monitor scenario execution, program blockers, defects, and system dependencies discussing and communicating
foreseeable risks.
Daily Summary
Program status reports are developed and distributed daily after the close of the current days SIT execution window. Reports will summaries the current days activities and provide
an overview of the programs accumulative test progress. Information will be distributed by email to all program management and supporting staff.
Defects
In Session Issue Tracking
Sub-Team leads will determine if issues reported by testers are defects or change requests and summarize details during the sessions in conjunction with the tester. The summary
and all supporting detail including the test number, and required HP-ALM fields will be emailed to QA for logging into HP-ALM.
Triage
When possible, ticket assignment will be made during testing sessions and provided to QA . This will be done when the Gatekeeper is available in the testing session to discuss and
review assignments. Otherwise assignments and ticket details will be updated by the Gatekeeper in advance of the triage meeting scheduled for the following day. Ticket
assignment will follow the defined matrix.
Defect Review & Tracking
HP-ALM defect triage meetings will be held daily and will focus on defect tickets as follows:
New ticket review beginning with the most critical issues
Aging defects review beginning with the most critical issues
Open questions and requests for assistance coordinating resolution on defects from the team leads
- 10 -
Table of Contents
Program Test Schedule and Status
Facility and Environment
Daily Agenda
Roles & Responsibilities
Defect Management Training
Access to Training Materials
- 11 -
Roles & Responsibilities
Stakeholders involved in the defect management process should be aware of their respective roles and responsibilities, as indicated
below, to ensure that key activities within the defect management process are accounted for.
Roles General Responsibilities
Responsible for the execution of test scenarios
Tester
Raise issues and defects found during testing
Review the defects logged within the last 24 hours.
ALM Gate Keeper Triage defects to appropriate technical and functional teams for resolution
Report the defect status on a daily basis to Test Lead
Assist testers with completing test cases by providing guidance on WD functionality and
Test Execution Support navigation during the testing sessions
(Yale and Deloitte Team Coordinate with testers to define and document defects during the testing sessions
Members) Review, fix, and/or reject defects
Proactively participate in defect triage meetings and tracking defect status
Coordinates defect triage meetings and monitors defect resolution progress
Serve as the point of contact on test execution status and reviews defects for validity and
severity
Project Test Lead
Coordinate with development team on progress of defect fixes and escalates issues
Coordinate and communicates upstream and downstream defect consequences
Accountable for overseeing defect fix progress among Development and Business teams
Accountable for the execution of test scenarios within their domain
Sub-Team Lead Provide domain knowledge necessary to assist testers with the execution of test scenarios
Validate the integrity of defects within their functional area
- 12 -
ALM Support Team
ALM Tickets will be categorized by Functional Area / Business Process
Names highlighted in Red will be the primary assignee of all ALM Tickets
Deloitte Support team members will also monitor ALM Tickets by Functional Area to ensure ALM Assignees have support to
work through and resolve issues
Workstream Workstream Leads Yale Sub-Team Leads Deloitte Sub-Team Leads
Financials • Jacqueline Tucker -- • Jeffrey Beecham
Financials – Banking and Settlement • Jacqueline Tucker • Agnes Siniscalchi • David Lane
Financials – Non-Sponsored A/R • Jacqueline Tucker • Deb Armitage • Yuji Suzuki
Financials - Business Asset Account • Jacqueline Tucker • Courtney Connors • Yuji Suzuki
Financials – Procure to Pay • Jacqueline Tucker • Rob Bores • N/A
• Tracy Strickland
• Nicole Riccitelli
Financials – Financial Accounting / ISPs • Jacqueline Tucker • Andy Sgambato • David Lane
Financials – Gifts • Jacqueline Tucker • Keith Della Rocco • Sandra Storrod
Financials – Payroll Costing • Jacqueline Tucker • Michele Greenhouse • Charles Williamson
Financials – Sponsored Awards • Jacqueline Tucker • Bob Davis • Sashi Golagani
Financials – Effort Certification • Jacqueline Tucker • Sandy Vitale • Marnie Fulton
Financials – Financial Management • Jacqueline Tucker • Shirley Chock • David Lane
Financials – FMD / COA • Jacqueline Tucker • Liz Bilodeau • N/A
Financials – Security • Jacqueline Tucker • Steven Fielding • N/A
- 13 -
ALM Support Team (cont.)
ALM Tickets will be categorized by Functional Area / Business Process
Names highlighted in Red will be the primary assignee of all ALM Tickets
Deloitte Support team members will also monitor ALM Tickets by Functional Area to ensure ALM Assignees have support to
work through and resolve issues
Workstream Workstream Leads Yale Sub-Team Leads Deloitte Sub-Team Leads
HCM • Ron Lipkins • HCM and ACM Team • N/A
• Anna-Maria members
Hummerstone
Technology • Darrell Cook • Arun Darwar • Brad Cobbs
• Kevin Quigley
Reporting • Kathleen Broderick • Tzu-Tzu • N/A
• Poojitha
• Michael
Data Warehouse • Angela Chen • Erin Totz • N/A
• Robert Scott
Security (HCM) • Ron Lipkins • Ron Lipkins • N/A
Security (Financials) • Steven Fielding • Steven Fielding • TBD
Testing • Jason Shuff • Jason Shuff • N/A
Organization Management • Kathy Byington • Sarath Kraus • Tomislav Beslic
Workday Setup Data (HCM) • Ron Lipkins • Ron Lipkins • N/A
Workday Setup Data (Financials) • Troy Morris • Troy Morris • Jeffrey Beecham
Conversion • Rodney Brunson • Rodney Brunson • Andrew Dinin
Impacted System Remediation • Linda Faust • System Owner • N/A
- 14 -
Table of Contents
Program Test Schedule and Status
Facility and Environment
Daily Agenda
Roles & Responsibilities
Defect Management Training
Access to Training Materials
- 15 -
ALM Process Flow
- 16 -
Defect Management Overview
Defect Review & Tracking through HPALM
• Testers / team members involved in testing will be trained for ALM prior to testing and will be given access to ALM.
• HPALM defect triage meetings will be held daily and as and when needed. will focus on defect tickets as follows:
‒ New ticket review beginning with the most critical issues
‒ Aging defects review beginning with the most critical issues
‒ Open questions and requests for assistance coordinating resolution on defects from the team leads
Triage
• When possible, ticket assignment will be made during testing sessions and provided to QA . This will be done when the Gatekeeper is available
in the testing session to discuss and review assignments. Otherwise assignments and ticket details will be updated by the Gatekeeper in
advance of the triage meeting scheduled for the following day. Ticket assignment will follow the defined matrix.
In Session Issue Tracking
• WD functional workstream SMEs will determine if issues reported by testers are defects or change requests and summarize detai ls during the
sessions in conjunction with the tester. The summary and all supporting detail including the test ID, test name, and required HPALM fields will be
emailed to QA for logging into HPALM.
Resolution Management
• Functional leads in conjunction with their team leads are expected to track and manage the resolution of issues/tickets and t o proactively update
HPALM comments and status. The Test Lead in conjunction with the PMO when needed will assist with the coordination of issues that cross
workstreams.
- 17 -
What is a Defect?
WORKDAY DEFECTS EXAMPLE
Defects occur in Workday when Yale’s configuration Workday accepts the submission of your
of the system, integrations and reporting do not transactions but sends the item down the wrong
work as initially designed. approval workflow.
However, these should not be confused with other Workday produces an error when attempting to
errors a user might encounter, such as receiving an submit a form with all required fields completed.
“error” message if a required field is left blank.
YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES IN DEFECT MANAGEMENT
Execute Test Cases
When appropriate, identify defect
Provide all necessary details
Work with your sub-team lead should you have a question if the issue discovered is acting within
our outside of the business definitions expected response.
Work with the Workday QA team should you have a question while entering an issue (defect,
enhancement, or discrepancy).
- 18 -
What is an Enhancement or Discrepancy?
WORKDAY Enhancement WORKDAY Discrepancy
A tester would submit an enhancement when the A discrepancy would be submitted for issues in
system is not following appropriate business which the system is functioning within expectations
process and there is no supporting project and there is no adverse effect but still the system
documentation identifying expected behavior. looks or acts peculiar.
The enhancement would represent a
requested/suggested change to the existing system
in support of expected business process response.
In HP ALM’s defect module, select Enhancement In HP ALM’s defect module, select Discrepancy for
for ‘Type’. ‘Type’.
- 19 -
Defect Details
Defect Severity:
Severity of a defect indicates its criticality amongst other defects identified. The severity is the effect of the defect on the application. Determination
is based on the number of test cases the defect impacts and the criticality of the associated requirements. Defect severity will determine the
timeframe for identification of a resolution to the defect.
Severity Description
This defect has caused all further processing to be suspended. There is no work around. The
1 - Critical
problem must be corrected for the project to be successful.
This defect has caused a serious problem in system processing. There may be a workaround, but it
2 - High
would result in additional work. The problem should be corrected for the project to be successful.
A problem that does not inhibit testing from continuing with relatively straightforward workarounds
3- Medium and/or has a minor impact on the business’ ability to use the application. Does not need to be fixed
before go-live but requires signoff by the business of the known issue before go-live.
This defect does not cause a significant user or processing problem. Typically it would be deferred
4 - Low
until after a release to production.
- 20 -
Defect Details
Defect Priority:
• Defects are to be prioritized in order to relate the urgency of their resolution for the delivery. The priority status for a defect is set by the Work
Stream Lead, indicating its importance. The severity of the defect will influence the priority of the defect.
Priority Description
Must be fixed in the next build. Without inclusion of this, the delivery is considered a
1-Urgent
failure.
Must be fixed in any of the upcoming builds, but should be included in the release.
2-High
Critical for success, but not necessary for the delivery.
3-Medium May be fixed after the current release or in the next release.
4-Low May or may not be fixed.
- 21 -
ALM Defect Status
Status Description Assignee Assigned To
All defects opened are flagged with Tester Gate Keeper
New a status of New with a value for
Severity and Priority
Gatekeeper is reviewing and Gate Keeper Yale Owner
Open
determine assignment
ALM Ticket has been assigned to Yale Owner Yale Support / Deloitte Support
Assigned
Yale Support
Issue is in Progress Yale Support / Deloitte Support Yale Support / Deloitte Support
In Progress
Ready for Defect has been fixed and ready for Yale Support / Deloitte Support Tester
Retest retesting
Test has failed, Gatekeeper to Tester Tester – Goes back to Yale Support
Failed
review and reassign
Defect has been resolved Tester Yale Owner confirms.
If Yale Owner disagrees the status
Resolved goes back to the Assigned status
and Yale Support team that worked
on the issue
Determined that it is Low Priority / Yale Owner Gate Keeper
Deferred Low Severity and will not impact Go-
Live
Determined that it is not a valid Yale Owner Gate Keeper
Rejected
defect or determined as a duplicate
- 22 -
HP ALM Access
https://hpalm.its.yale.edu/qcbin/start_a.jsp
- 23 -
