A defect fix breaks another feature. How can we prevent this?
Insufficient regression protectionAssess affected interfaces and run relevant regression checks before considering the fix complete. Preserve a reproducible test for the original failure so the correction remains verifiable.
What to do now
- Reproduce the original defect
- Identify connected behavior and interfaces
- Test the fix and affected regression paths
- Add durable verification evidence
When to escalate
Escalate when
The fix threatens data integrity or critical existing behavior.
Who decides
The acceptance authority and relevant quality owner
Example
A permission fix is tested against both restricted and authorized user journeys.
Mistake to avoid
Testing only the exact symptom that prompted the change.
Prevent a repeat
Check that closure evidence proves the agreed outcome instead of relying only on a completion percentage.
Suggested ApprovedFlow setup
- Tasks
- Documents
- Approvals
Attach acceptance criteria and test evidence to the deliverable or task, then record the authorized review decision. See the platform
Related cases
- We cannot reproduce a reported defect. Should we close it?Insufficient defect evidence
- Quality reviews find the same defects repeatedly. How do we improve prevention?Repeated defect causes
- Another team says our dependency is not their priority. What should we do?Unagreed external dependency
- The model changed and our AI workflow became less reliable. What do we do?Uncontrolled model-version change