Verification vs validation

[Carolina]

I am struggling with the concepts of verification and validation.

Assuming both activities are to be executed by the development organisation, what is the actual difference?

– Verification would be testing to what extent the product adheres to some feature specification, a list of criteria.

– Validation would be testing how well the product delivers on some user requirement, also a list of criteria.

In both cases, results would be something like “it is possible to do this or that”, or “there is a problem when attempting to do this or that”.

Having a development organisation of the agile school, where a team is responsible for the entire lifecycle, including discovery, requirements, design, development, quality assurance, delivery and post-market surveillance, it is likley that verification and validation are only differentiated by when in the development cycle they are applied.

 

So, how to distinguish between these two?

 

Looking at various regulatory requirements, there is a distinct difference: Verifying implies checking for errors and confirming expected functionality. Validation on the other hand entails proving that some intention has been met or fulfiled. Can a mere test execution accomplish validation? If so, again, what is the difference between verifying and validating?

 

[Connor]

Your exploration of verification and validation, particularly in an agile development setting, raises important questions. The differentiation between checking adherence to specifications and ensuring user requirements are met is crucial. The regulatory angle emphasizing error checking for verification and proving intentions for validation adds a valuable perspective. It’s intriguing to consider whether test execution alone can achieve validation and what nuances exist between verifying and x trench run validating.

[Author]

Posts