Build, Test, Fix
Abstract
Chris and Fred discuss the “build, test, fix” approach—and why it often leads to poor reliability outcomes when misunderstood. They explain why testing should generate insight, not act as a late-stage safety net.
Key Points
In this episode, Chris and Fred unpack the common but often misunderstood “build, test, fix” approach to product development. While it can be a powerful method when used correctly, it is frequently reduced to a passive process where teams assume reliability will be addressed during scheduled testing. The discussion highlights how this mindset delays learning, increases costs, and leads to poor design decisions. Instead, this episode reframes testing as a tool for reducing uncertainty and driving better decisions throughout development—not something reserved for the end.
Topics include:
- “Build, test, fix” often turns into “build and hope.” Many teams assume reliability will be handled during a scheduled test phase, which causes engineers to disengage from reliability during design.
- Testing should create insight—not confirm success. The real value of testing is in uncovering failure modes and reducing uncertainty, not proving that a design works.
- Reliability is created by decisions, not tests. Every design, material, and supplier decision contributes to reliability—testing simply reveals the consequences of those decisions.
- Poor testing strategies can hide real problems. Testing designed to “pass” rather than to learn can give false confidence while critical failure modes remain undiscovered.
- Understanding how things fail is a competitive advantage. Engineers and suppliers who can clearly explain failure modes—and when they occur—are far more credible than those who claim their products “never fail.
Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can join friends as they discuss reliability topics. Join us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches.
Leave a Reply