Decision-ready
The full cost table and a routing decision. The evidence supports a recommendation and we make one.
Map
See where regression is costing you
A fixed-price assessment of implemented, continuously-changing systems, using your own cost, cadence and incident numbers to build a business case you can sign.
01The blind spot
You know what your testing team costs. You do not know what regression costs.
Most organisations know what QA costs in total. Very few know what regression costs per platform. Without that number, regression stays a recurring chore instead of a problem someone can fix.
02The boundary
Live systems only
Map looks at platforms that are implemented and changing — a platform has to be live before its regression cost is measurable at all. A programme still in flight goes to Pod, which is built for exactly that case: nothing stable to measure yet, but something to build.
The assessment takes three to four weeks, subject to your inputs arriving. We work from data you already have plus a short interview with each platform owner. We do not need to interrupt your engineers, your testers, or your release cycles.
03Inputs
What we need from you
- The release calendar
- The regression pack, or current test cases, for live platforms
- Contractor rates or invoices — whatever establishes the real cost
- Twelve months of incident history
- An environments and CI overview
- One focused hour with each platform owner
What we do not need
- To interrupt your engineers or testers
- To pause or reschedule a release
- Access to production data
- A new tool, licence or platform on your side
04The calculation
One number per platform
For each platform we work out what regression really costs a year: manual hours per release, times the rate, times releases per year. Then we weigh that against how often you ship and what has broken before. The platforms worth fixing are expensive, frequent and genuinely risky. Two out of three rarely justifies the spend.
05What you get
A one-page business case, in your numbers
| Cost table | One page per platform: current regression cost against what covering it would cost. |
|---|---|
| First journeys | The first six to eight priority journeys named, with their complexity allocation recorded. |
| Scope register | A draft register of journeys — entry, outcome, variants, data, environment and owner. |
| Sequenced roadmap | What to do first, what to defer, and what to leave alone. |
06Outcomes
Three possible outcomes
Readiness required
A clear data-gap list showing what is missing or unreliable, a recovery plan, and a revised schedule. No soft recommendation from weak evidence.
Stop
A short memo saying what cannot be concluded, and why. If the work turns out to be bigger than a standard shape, we say so and quote it properly rather than bury it in a package.
07The honest answer
Sometimes the answer is not to buy from us
- Cover — the numbers support recurring assurance on named journeys.
- Pod, then Cover — the capability has to be built before anything can maintain it.
- Hire an engineer — the work is continuous and belongs inside your team.
- Leave it alone — the platform is stable, the suite is healthy and owned, and regression is not costing you enough to act.
- Decommission anyway — the platform is on its way out and the money is better not spent.
Start with the portfolio, not another test case
Tell us what you are running and how often it ships, and we will tell you whether an assessment is worth your money.