HP Quality Center Integration with ARIS

Klaus Schulz on May 10, 2012

Hello,

We are using HP Quality Center (HPQC, HP ALM) for our test cases. I recently learned that we can use ARIS Test Designer to define Test Cases and export them to HP Quality Centre. We further have the need to related the test cases to processes, requirments and system/business use cases. (FYI: we don't use Solution Manager yet).

Who has experience with ARIS / HP Quality Center integration (without using SAP SolMan)?
Who can share scenarios/expamples/best practices to integrate both applications? Should a syncronization be based on projects, application or processes?
Are there other ways to sync with HP than .xml or .xls export? And how to ensure versioning in both systems? Is a roundtrip possible?
What benefit do we have by using ARIS Test Designer and exporting it to HP, as doing it directly in HPQC?

Looking forward to your feedback

Klaus

Notify Moderator

Bob Sweeney on November 19, 2012

Hi Klaus

I am generating test scripts using Test Designer and loading them to HPQC without going through Solman.

I spec’d out a report to output the script in an Excel format that can be imported using HPQC’s “Add In” facility, then used a vendor to develop the report. There was a learning curve to understand some of the underlying assumptions and logic involved with test designer. But now it’s working well and is quite simple to use. It is only a one way relationship; therefore you must maintain the model in order to stay in synch with any test script changes.

Regarding benefits:

We are currently using this to support testing in a large system implementation project (non-SAP). We are using it to define functional tests, End to End testing and organizational readiness testing. Besides the obvious benefit of avoiding two separate efforts to describe the process step and the test step, linking the two drives increased quality of both:
Executing the test steps often reveals dependencies, exceptions and tasks overlooked when first defining the model. Updating the model with these findings makes it more accurate.
Events represent expected results. Many users and modelers find it difficult to grasp the use and benefit of incorporating events in a model. This is one justification for their use and drives a more robust description of the events.
Starting with a graphical view makes context and dependencies and variations more visible than starting with a blank Excel sheet when defining test steps.
The ability to use FAD objects such as Roles, Business Rules, Business Requirements, Application System Type, Data objects etc., provide a much richer test step description, with little or no extra effort.

At some point we plan to implement PPM. I see a great opportunity to use models describing actual process execution, as an excellent and accurate way of maintaining regression tests.

I hope this provides you with some information and encouragement.

Bob

or register to reply.

Notify Moderator

Reset Password