Why Skipping QA Software Testing Is Not Cost-Effective

Quality assurance (QA) is an integral part of software development that ensures a product is functional, reliable, and user-friendly. Companies use testing as a way to ensure that products comply with standards and regulations. However, not everyone agrees.

Some companies believe that bypassing QA testing saves time and money. In reality, neglecting software testing often leads to false economy – a term used to describe how the short-term cost savings are overshadowed by the long-term expense and damage that the initial cost savings could cause.

 In this article, we’ll look at why companies avoid QA and the real costs of not testing software. We will also showcase real-life examples of the consequences of omitting testing and provide recommendations for the best practices for cost-efficient testing.

Why Companies Skip Software Testing

Businesses may opt to avoid software testing for several reasons. Typically, the main motivation is money: bypassing testing is most often an effort to cut costs or speed up development. Some of the most common reasons include:

• Having a limited budget

• Working with tight schedules

• Relying on the dev team to test

• Misunderstanding the value of QA

Businesses that skip testing are mostly smaller companies or startups. However, it’s not odd to see firms with 100+ employees who have not assigned a QA team for product testing.

One of the most common reasons why testing is avoided is the budget. Simply put, startups and small-scale businesses have not created a budget for QA, which means they cannot afford a team that would specifically be in charge of testing.

Another common argument is that they do not have time. Dev teams are often working under tight deadlines, and QA testing may be seen as a bottleneck. With testing, the time it takes for the product to reach the market is considerably prolonged, so skipping testing altogether may seem like an easy way to cut corners.  

Testing is also often considered inconsequential, a task that anyone can do. Hence, companies might ask the dev team to perform the testing themselves, as it’s just an extra task that takes little to no time. This is problematic on several levels. It both creates extra work for the team and still does not ensure the product is tested as a whole.

All this stems from the erroneous belief that QA is optional rather than essential. Companies that view testing as an extra step and not a crucial one risk the entire project.

The Reality of Bypassing QA

Avoiding software testing might seem like a quick way to cut expenses or an unimportant step. In reality, it can very easily cause issues that could snowball into problems post-launch.

Here are the four main pitfalls of circumventing testing during development:

1. Fixing bugs after launch is significantly more expensive.

2. Security bugs or regulatory violations can lead to fines and lawsuits.

3. Poor user experience often leads to a loss of customers.

4. Bad reviews and negative press can impact future sales.

Fixing Bugs Post-Launch

Launching a product without testing means that few checks were performed to ensure the product is ready for release. And once the product is launched, it’s not odd to witness issues or bugs appearing. These bugs are far more expensive when caught after launch than bugs detected during development.

Fixing issues after a product has been released may require an entire list of solutions that add costs to development, such as emergency patches, extensive product rework, and significant downtime during which the product cannot be used. All of this considerably increases costs and produces delays, which is what the company tried to avoid in the first place.

Legal and Compliance Risks

Flaws in security and potential regulatory violations caused by inadequate testing can result in fines and legal repercussions. Products, especially in industries that deal with sensitive data (such as finance, healthcare, etc.) must adhere to strict compliance standards. Failure to do so often has severe consequences.

Should the product fail to meet the standards or have security threats, the company will face enormous scrutiny, fees and fines, and even legal liability. Such products are vulnerable to cyber-attacks and other similar security threats. Hence, testing before development is instrumental in ensuring the safety and functionality of the product before it hits the market.

Customer Dissatisfaction

QA is not only about testing and fixing bugs. QA ensures the product is working properly, but also that it is fully suitable for end users. In simple terms, the role of QA is to ensure the product meets all the requirements of the clients. Should the customers encounter any type of glitches, crashes, or other forms of usability issues, it will lead to poor user experience.

Customer dissatisfaction may result in negative feedback, lower retention rates, and even product abandonment. Then the time and effort the dev team invested in the product and then avoided testing to speed up the process of getting the product to the customers will be in vain.

Brand Reputation Damage

Poor customer experiences equal bad reviews and negative feedback. Over time, that feedback can have a long-lasting impact on a company’s reputation. And feedback is important. In fact, a recent study claims that 7 in 10 customers check online reviews always, or regularly. A large number of respondents (73%) check more than one source when deciding.

Even a single high-profile failure can drive existing and potential customers away. Not only that, but it can also deter potential investors from working with the company in the future.

Real-World Examples Where Avoiding QA Hurt the Company

Mistakes are normal, but what happens when small mistakes, such as inconsequential oversights, turn out to be too big issues?

As you’ll soon see, there are mistakes that can be easily avoided, because if not, they can lead to serious repercussions. Here are some brief examples of companies that decided to forego testing and what that caused.

1. Knight Capital Group (2012) – Knight Capital Group was a financial services firm working in sales and trading. In 2012, the company had a scandal of epic proportions when a trading error caused by a glitch in the trading algorithm produced a $440 million loss in just 45 minutes. The glitch could have been prevented by thorough testing, which was not done on time. The unfortunate event ultimately bankrupted the firm.

2. TSB Bank (2018) – In 2018, the TSB Bank, a British retail and commercial bank, was rolling out an IT update during a migration of customer records to a new platform. The update failed, leaving 1.9 million customers without access to their banking accounts for over a week. Automated testing, such as regression and performance testing, could have prevented the issue. As a result, the bank suffered irreparable damage to its reputation and was even fined £49m.

3. Samsung Galaxy Note 7 (2016) – Samsung is one of the biggest tech companies in the world, with Galaxy Note devices promoted as a key product. However, in 2016, insufficient battery testing of the devices led to overheating and explosions. As a result, Samsung had to perform a global recall of the product. This caused both financial damage and damage to Samsung’s reputation.

4. Microsoft (2024) – Another faulty update caused a global outage that affected Windows users around the globe. CrowdStrike performed a faulty update, which resulted in millions of BSOD errors that disrupted a number of sectors in many countries. Microsoft lost $23bn in market value. Over 8.5 million devices were affected by the lack of meticulous testing.

How Software Testing Can Help Save Money

Finding and fixing issues on time during early development is easier, faster, and even sometimes cheaper. Moreover, testing also ensures the overall quality and functionality of the product, which then leads to better user experiences.

Here’s a brief list of the many ways in which testing during development benefits the company and reduces costs.

Best QA Testing Practices That Are Great for Cost-Efficiency

As budgeting and the financial aspect are the most common reasons why companies circumvent testing, there are ways to ensure that testing is still done but in a cost-effective way.

In fact, a number of upcoming QA testing trends in 2025 are focused on cost-saving practices that promote safety and efficiency.

Some of the best methodologies for minimizing costs and maximizing productivity include automated testing, CI/CT, user acceptance testing, and regression testing.

Automated Testing

Thanks to automated testing tools, the need for manual testing has been greatly reduced. Manual testing is often prone to errors and is slower than test automation. That is why test automation, especially scriptless test automation, is a great solution for cost-efficient testing.

With rigorous automated testing, the team can speed up bug detection. More importantly, automated testing guarantees consistency across multiple test cases, which is crucial for the end users.

Continuous Integration and Continuous Testing (CI/CT)

Continuous integration and continuous testing (CI and CT) are instrumental in ensuring functionality and quality at every stage of development by running tests continuously. Tests are being run automatically throughout the development lifecycle.

By integrating QA testing into the development pipeline, teams can catch issues earlier than with other methods. They can also maintain ongoing quality checks. CT also helps reduce the costs of later production by being very proactive about issue detection.

User Acceptance Testing (UAT)

User acceptance testing, application testing, or end-user testing, involves end users in the testing phase. End users are the intended audience for the product. So, allowing them to test the product ensures the software meets the needs and requirements of the customers.

UAT is performed as the final stage before the official launch of the product. Testing on real-world users ensures the software meets real-world usability expectations, which can prevent expensive redesigns.

Regression Testing

Testing that is done almost too late – i.e., not done in the early stages of development – may sometimes lead to additional bugs. To avoid that, a solid solution is the use of regression testing.

Regression testing ensures that new updates do not introduce bugs or break existing features of the software. As a result, testing can help prevent unnecessary troubleshooting costs down the line.

Crowdsourcing

Crowdsourcing is another very cost-efficient way to test software. It’s not as failsafe as other testing methodologies because it involves testing by a group of testers unrelated to the company. The group of testers tests the software in real-world circumstances, which often shortens the process and allows the product to reach end-users faster.

However, testers change often, so employing a QA team in-house is a better solution long-term as it ensures the testers are familiar with the software and are less likely to make mistakes.

Conclusion

Skipping software testing might seem like a sound cost-cutting measure. However, as we have shown, the long-term consequences can be disastrous.

From unnecessary reworks to damaged reputations and legal penalties, neglecting QA can trigger far more issues than it can possibly solve. And as saving money is the most common reason for avoiding testing, it turns out that doing so often leads to bigger expenses than it saves.

Overall, investing in software testing ensures a more stable, user-friendly product that is efficient and ready for use.  In cases where finances are a problem, finding cost-efficient QA methodologies can help maintain product quality without overspending.

In case you want to learn more about QA and how it can affect your business, feel free to browse through our blog where we explore various facets of software testing. Finally, if you want to discuss QA strategies with our team, you can always reach out for a free consultation.