QA outsourcing engagement models explained

The four models in one table

Most QA outsourcing proposals fall into one of four shapes. The labels vary between vendors, so judge a proposal by what it commits to, not by what it calls itself.

Model	Who owns the test strategy	Who directs daily work	Priced by	Who carries delivery risk
Staff augmentation	You	You	Person, per day or hour	Mostly you
Dedicated team	Shared, usually you	Vendor lead, to your priorities	Team, per month	Shared
Managed testing service	Vendor, agreed with you	Vendor	Service, with service levels	Mostly the vendor
Fixed-scope project	Vendor, against your requirements	Vendor	Deliverables or milestones	Mostly the vendor

The UK Sourcing Playbook asks public buyers to decide the delivery model before going to market, because the model shapes the specification, the pricing and the contract. The same order works for a product company: decide the model, then write the RFP.

Staff augmentation

You add individual testers to your own team. They attend your ceremonies, work from your backlog and follow your process. The vendor supplies people and handles their employment.

This model suits you when you already have a test lead, a working process and a clear idea of what needs testing, but not enough hands. It gives you the most control and the least protection. If the work is poor, the contract usually only lets you ask for a replacement.

What you still manage: the test strategy, prioritisation, reviewing the work, and onboarding each person. Budget time for that. A staff augmentation contract with nobody on your side to direct the testers tends to produce activity without direction.

What to insist on: named people with CVs, the right to interview them, replacement terms with notice and an overlap period, and clear ownership of anything they write. See how QA vendors staff projects.

Dedicated team

The vendor provides a stable team that works only on your product, usually with its own lead. You set priorities; the vendor lead organises the work, handles absences and keeps the team trained.

This suits you when you want continuity and some management taken off your plate, but you are not ready to hand over the strategy. The risk is that it is priced like staff augmentation (a monthly fee per head) while you expect the accountability of a managed service. Ask directly which outcomes the vendor lead is responsible for.

Managed testing service

The vendor takes responsibility for an agreed testing outcome, such as regression testing for each release, and decides how to staff and run it. You buy a service defined by scope and service levels rather than by people.

This is close to what US federal acquisition rules call performance-based acquisition: describe the required results, set measurable standards, and let the supplier propose how to meet them. It moves more risk to the vendor, but only if the outcomes are measurable and the contract attaches consequences to them. See SLA metrics that matter.

What you still manage: defining scope, providing environments and test data, reviewing reports, and deciding whether a release goes out. The vendor should not certify its own release readiness without giving you the evidence to challenge it.

Fixed-scope project

The vendor delivers a defined result for a defined price: an automation framework for a set of user journeys, a one-off accessibility audit, a performance test before launch. Payment is tied to deliverables and acceptance.

This suits work with a clear end. It fails when scope is vague, because every gap becomes a change request. Write acceptance criteria before signature, for example that the automation suite runs in your pipeline on a clean environment and is documented well enough for your engineers to extend.

How the model changes your RFP and scorecard

The model should change what you ask for and how you weigh answers:

• Staff augmentation: weight the named team, seniority and continuity heavily. Ask for CVs and interviews.
• Dedicated team: add the lead's role, reporting, and how the team handles absence and growth.
• Managed service: weight test strategy, service levels, reporting and remedies. Ask for a sample status report.
• Project: weight the plan, deliverables, acceptance criteria and ownership of what is built.

The RFP builder lets you state the model up front so that vendors answer the same question. The scorecard then lets you adjust weights to match it.

How the model changes cost

Rates are only comparable within a model. A managed service price includes management, tooling and the vendor's risk; a staff augmentation rate usually does not. Put each proposal into the cost model with the roles, hours and extras broken out, and add your own management time for the models that need it. Your internal time is a real cost, and it is highest in staff augmentation.

Common mismatches to look for

• A proposal called "managed" that names no service levels and no remedies.
• A dedicated team where the lead is shared across several clients.
• A fixed-price project with no acceptance criteria and an open change request clause.
• Any model where test code sits in the vendor's repository rather than yours.

If you are still deciding, the selection path shows where the model decision sits relative to the RFP, questions and scoring.