QA Engineer at Every Stage

How Quality Assurance Evolves from Manual Bug Hunter to Holistic Quality Strategist

Introduction

QA Engineers are often viewed as the safety net of software development—catching bugs that slipped past devs and making sure the product doesn’t spontaneously combust in front of a customer. But the role is much more than that—and how it plays out depends heavily on the stage of the company.

In this post, we’ll walk through what a QA Engineer really does at each stage of company growth, from a tiny three-person team to a 100+ person engineering org. We’ll talk headcount ratios, testing responsibility distribution, dangerous anti-patterns, and what good looks like.

Phase 1: The 3-Person Startup

Vibe: Everything’s on fire. No time for polish. The product isn’t even sure what it is yet.

Key Responsibilities:

• If a QA exists, they’re probably also writing docs, doing support tickets, and manually testing in prod.
• Exploratory testing (with a flashlight and a prayer).
• Helping define acceptance criteria (if those even exist).

Hats to Wear:

• UX whisperer (because there’s no designer)
• Early warning system (catching catastrophic bugs before they make it into a demo)

Hats to Avoid:

• Building a test case management system. You don’t need it yet. Google Docs is fine.
• Creating a separate bug backlog. Just fix things immediately.

Who Should Handle Testing:

• Everyone. Devs should test their own stuff. PMs should dogfood constantly.
• QA, if present, can guide and spot-check. But not own everything.

Success Looks Like:

• The app works well enough to not embarrass you during a pitch.
• Bugs are caught before users encounter them.

Pitfalls:

• Over-formalizing. Don’t waste time building process before product-market fit.

Suggested QA Headcount: 0-1 (max 1 QA per 5-6 engineers, if you even have a QA yet)

Phase 2: The 10-Person Team

Vibe: More structured, but still chaotic. You’re shipping fast. Found some traction.

Key Responsibilities:

• Define regression test checklists.
• Begin setting up automation (unit + some E2E).
• Facilitate bug triage and sprint test planning.

Hats to Wear:

• Light project manager (ensuring things are testable and verified)
• First responder (verifying hotfixes quickly in production)

Hats to Avoid:

• Acting like the gatekeeper for releases. QA should collaborate, not block.
• Writing all the tests yourself. Engineers must contribute.

Who Should Handle Testing:

• Engineers should own unit/integration tests.
• QA helps define what to automate and what to explore.

Success Looks Like:

• Bugs are caught pre-release.
• Test suite exists and runs in CI.

Pitfalls:

• No clear definition of done. QA becomes a dumping ground.
• Still no metrics—test coverage and flakiness are unknown.

Suggested QA Headcount: 1 QA per 6–8 engineers

Phase 3: The 25-Person Department

Vibe: Teams have formed. Tech debt is real. You’re preparing for scale.

Key Responsibilities:

• Formalize test plans per feature.
• Maintain and evolve E2E test suites.
• Collaborate with DevOps on release pipelines.
• Establish quality metrics (e.g., escape rate, test coverage, MTTR).

Hats to Wear:

• Process coach (guiding teams on test pyramid philosophy)
• Release coordinator (ensuring features meet acceptance criteria)

Hats to Avoid:

• Becoming a silo. QA must be embedded in teams, not external.
• Owning product correctness alone—this belongs to the whole team.

Who Should Handle Testing:

• Engineers: Unit, service tests, and automation.
• QA: Exploratory, regression, system-level sanity.

Success Looks Like:

• Releases are stable and predictable.
• Automation handles the repetitive; humans focus on edge cases.

Pitfalls:

• Slowing releases by over-testing.
• Ignoring flaky tests (which erodes trust in automation).

Suggested QA Headcount: 1 QA per 5–6 engineers, or 1 per squad

Phase 4: The 100-Person Org

Vibe: Engineering is now a structured org. You have multiple teams, CI/CD pipelines, and real SLOs.

Key Responsibilities:

• Lead quality strategy across org.
• Develop tooling to support faster, safer releases.
• Train engineers in quality ownership.
• Define release criteria, test coverage goals, and triage protocols.

Hats to Wear:

• Quality evangelist (owning quality culture, not just testing)
• Metrics translator (turning flaky tests and escaped bugs into business priorities)

Hats to Avoid:

• Manually running test suites. This should be automated and reliable.
• Acting like a janitor for every bug. QA can’t own quality alone.

Who Should Handle Testing:

• Engineers: Test ownership by default.
• QA: Coaching, systems thinking, and escalations.

Success Looks Like:

• Quality metrics improve release over release.
• Testing is fast, reliable, and trusted.

Pitfalls:

• Underinvesting in quality tooling.
• Treating QA as an afterthought while pushing for speed.

Suggested QA Headcount: 1 QA per squad or embedded SDET + centralized QA leadership

Summary Table

Advice for Aspiring QA Engineers

• 🛑 Don't try to "own" quality. Enable others to.
• 🧪 Automate what’s repeatable, explore what’s critical.
• 🔄 Treat flaky tests as bugs. Fix or remove them.
• 🎯 Define quality in business terms, not just pass/fail.
• 📈 Always measure the impact of your role—velocity, stability, coverage.
• 🤝 Push for shared responsibility, not handoffs.

Final Thoughts: Are QA Engineers Worth It?

Short answer: Yes—but only if they’re not treated like glorified testers.

Hiring QA Engineers (or non-technical testers) should come with intent:

• Are they helping your engineers build better software?
• Do they shorten time to confidence?
• Can you measure their contribution to release quality and cycle time?

If QA is just a bucket for bugs or a late-stage gate, you’re doing it wrong. If QA is a coach, guide, and system thinker that improves engineering output and customer satisfaction—they’re invaluable.

So before you hire 4 QA folks to "help the devs go faster," ask instead: What’s broken in our process that makes QA the bandaid? Then you’ll know what role they’re really here to play.