You can call us here: 212.677.2542
You can mail us here: public1@forwardconcept.com

• We’re detail oriented.
• We’re currently using our model, and it works well.
• There’s a low cost of entry.
• Site testing jobs usually contain a purpose mismatch between how much institutional knowledge a good QA resource needs, and how long QA staff are typically retained. We structure the QA relationship in a way that lets you retain QA staff long-term, which turns out to be a very efficient way to manage QA. We call our approach “Fractional QA”.

• You notice the currency markets shifting against you, and don’t have local resources available to perform the jobs you need.
• You have a special project that is best handled by directly connecting QA staff with internal resources.
• You’d like to have your resources meet with staff on a reasonable schedule.
• You have an “institutionalized knowledge” task to perform, which will take you only 1 hour to show in person, but up to 1 day to write up.

Please do! We’re firm believers in the benefits of full-time staff, if you need full-time staff. Additionally, we don’t concentrate on full-time staffing needs. We focus on fractional staffing needs. However, if you were so inclined, under the Forward Concept model you have the option to retain 6 people (part-time equiv.) for the cost of hiring 1 staff member. That averages out to 3 people’s worth of full-time work you can call on, during special projects. That’s significantly more overhead than one full-time staffer can generate during crunch-time. It’s a great model for tasks that require familiarity, but vary greatly between periods of high and low activity.

We guarantee performance by only bringing on the kind of people who are adept at detail oriented tasks. As a company, we offer a level of work flexibility that is rare, so we’re able to retain qualified individuals who have prioritized being available to their families over all else. These individuals know that in exchange for the flexibility of predominantly working from home, they have to be on call for client needs, during their allotted coverage times.

Everybody climbs the efficiency ladder one step. Even your alpha QA folks could make better use of their time if they were to focus on code debug instead of beta QA (usability) testing.

Think of alpha testing as the technical side of testing. It's something that a new-hire in your programming department would do - checking code and looking for technical problems. Beta testing (usability testing / site testing) is the kind of testing where someone is using your site, looking for things that break - a necessary process for a dynamic environment, and/or post-rollout. It is inefficient work for your programmers, or even your alpha testers, to perform day in and day out. Usually, it stops getting done, or doesn't get done, and that's where the risks occur.