Pilot Release with a Privacy Defect
MediTrack is building a patient appointment app for a clinic group. A release is due in six days for a pilot with two clinics. The test lead reports 38 open defects: 4 severity 1, 11 severity 2, and 23 severity 3. One severity 1 defect causes double-booking when two receptionists book the same slot; another exposes a patient's date of birth to another patient. The pilot is a marketing commitment and the clinic has trained staff. The development manager proposes releasing with all severity 1 defects documented as known issues and fixing them in a patch two weeks later. The quality plan says no severity 1 or 2 defects may enter a pilot, but it also allows a documented exception approved by the clinical safety officer. The clinical safety officer is on leave until the release date. The project sponsor is pressuring to go live.
1. Assess the quality decision using DPMM principles. What is the key distinction?
Read the worked answer
The key distinction is between a documented known issue and an accepted quality risk. A severity 1 defect that exposes one patient's date of birth to another is not a documentation issue; it is a privacy breach and cannot be 'patched later' for a pilot involving real patients. The double-booking defect affects clinical operations and patient trust. DPMM's quality principle does not mean zero defects; it means the agreed quality level is never compromised without an explicit, authorised trade-off.
The quality plan already provides the mechanism: an exception approved by the clinical safety officer. That is the correct route, not the development manager's unilateral proposal. The sponsor's marketing commitment is a business constraint, not a quality authority. The project manager must separate defects that can be tolerated at pilot scale with a verified workaround from those that are unacceptable regardless of date.
The decision should be based on patient impact, likelihood, detectability, and the strength of any workaround. It should not be based on the release calendar alone.
2. What would you do about the exception approval and the release?
Read the worked answer
Do not release with the privacy defect. Either fix it before the pilot or disable the affected view or feature for the pilot with a verified workaround. For double-booking, implement a temporary lock or a manual booking rule and test it. Both actions need evidence, not just a promise.
Seek the clinical safety officer's approval. If that person is unavailable, escalate to a named deputy or the clinical governance lead. Do not self-approve an exception. If no authorised approver can be found before the date, the default is to delay the pilot or reduce pilot scope to non-patient-facing functions.
Inform the sponsor with evidence: defect severity, patient impact, workaround, residual risk, and a recommended option. Record the decision, approver, and review date. A patch two weeks later is not a mitigation for a live privacy exposure. It is a plan to operate with a known breach.
The project manager's duty is to make the trade-off explicit and authorised, not to protect the release date by redefining the quality threshold.
3. How would you handle the 11 severity 2 defects and the pilot go/no-go?
Read the worked answer
Triage the severity 2 defects individually. Which affect safety, data integrity, or the core booking workflow? Fix or provide a tested workaround for those. Defer cosmetic and low-frequency defects with an owner and target date. Do not treat all severity 2 defects as one category.
Define exit criteria for the pilot: zero open severity 1 defects; severity 2 defects only with an approved workaround and clinical sign-off; severity 3 logged and scheduled. Hold a go/no-go review 24 hours before release with quality, clinical, and sponsor representation. Review the evidence against the criteria, not the pressure to launch.
Communicate openly with clinic staff about any workarounds so they are not surprised. After the pilot, review defect trends and the effectiveness of workarounds. This protects the pilot's learning objective without pretending the product is finished. It also preserves trust with the clinics, which is more valuable than a marketing date.