From QA Maturity to a Shared Quality Culture from Scratch: Hepsiburada’s Journey

A 3-year transformation story from heterogeneous QA teams to a strong quality culture.

At Hepsiburada, quality management is not just about processes. We had a talented team, each working with very different methods. While some of our teammates needed guidance in basic test scenarios, others were developing their own automation frameworks. Because of this disparity, we couldn’t maintain a systematic dynamic. This lack of synchronization prevented effective collaboration between teams. The gap wasn’t just about technical knowledge; it was a lack of shared vision.

That’s why we said, “It’s time for everyone to follow the same quality compass.” And so, we began a challenging yet transformative QA Maturity journey that would last for three years.

Current Situation Analysis: Heterogeneous Team Structure

As a first step, we laid out the current status of all our QA teams. Our main goal was to understand what we were facing and to prepare a systematic management plan accordingly. Upon review, we discovered that:

• There were serious inconsistencies in test documentation,
• Automation efforts varied from team to team, and a unified structure couldn’t be established,
• There were disconnects in defect management and feedback mechanisms,
• Contribution levels to sprint processes were unequal across teams,
• And most importantly: we lacked a shared testing culture.

This situation not only made our business processes more difficult but also directly impacted our product quality. Therefore, it became clear that we needed a corporate transformation rather than individual approaches.

Now that we had identified the problem, we asked the question: “What should we do to solve it?” At this point, we needed a solid roadmap.

QA Maturity: How Was the Roadmap Shaped?

Our goal was to unite the entire QA team under a common quality understanding, identify improvement areas correctly, and move the teams into a measurable, sustainable structure. But we didn’t forget the main question: How?

To find the answer, we didn’t just look inward. We aligned ourselves with the internationally recognized TMMi (Test Maturity Model Integration) model. This gave us a framework that could guide us not only today but also into the future.

We defined competencies and responsibilities aligned with today’s dynamics. However, most of these were long-term and required sustainability. So, we used a classification method to break them down into short-term, medium-term, and long-term criteria.

Some examples from our competency areas are shared below:

• Test Case Writing and Test Design Techniques: Assessed based on TMMi Level 2.
• Bug Reporting Quality: Analyzed for clarity, level of detail, and effectiveness in the defect lifecycle.
• Automation Competency: Evaluated under Level 3 with focus on tool knowledge, framework contribution, and sustainability perspective.
• Integration into Sprint and Software Processes: Observed active contributions in planning, refinement, and release phases.
• Process Ownership and Initiative: Behavioral skills like leadership, improvement suggestions, and taking responsibility were evaluated.

Each criterion was designed to support both individual and organizational development.

But as we unlocked new levels, new challenges appeared. At this point, it was necessary to transfer the structures we had prepared to the QA teams and define development steps.

Roadmap: Clear and Flexible Steps for Each Level

First, we created a detailed and agile development roadmap tailored to the competency levels we defined. This map was designed to be flexible, covering both technical and non-technical areas.

We set visible, measurable outcomes for each area. Within this scope, we had already begun developing a shared culture.

For automation, we didn’t just focus on tool knowledge; we defined indicators like integrating AI-based automation, contributing to learning processes, and taking active roles within frameworks.

For process ownership, we clarified non-technical outputs such as managing regression areas, in-sprint guidance, and contributing to the QA culture.

Thus, our QA teammates could choose their desired area for personal growth and track the processes in that domain.

Of course, to ensure measurability, a scoring system was necessary. So, we built a weighted scoring system that covered all areas. This enabled:

• QA teammates to track their development with a score-based method,
• Leads to make promotion and development decisions more objectively and fairly,
• A clear development goal to be defined for each level.

Throughout this process, we didn’t want to be the only demanding side. To overcome this, we established a strong and effective Mentorship Program. This way, we could provide support to every teammate in need.

Training and Mentorship Program: A Culture Growing Together

To ensure the sustainability of development, we launched a training and mentorship program that systematized knowledge sharing.

With this program:

• Weekly technical sessions increased knowledge in areas like test automation, API testing, and exploratory testing,
• Experienced QA professionals mentored their teammates one-on-one; practical experience was gained through real scenarios,
• Peer-review processes were activated,
• All documentation and best practices were made accessible in a central knowledge hub.

We integrated many new systems and technologies to support these processes.

Knowledge sharing was no longer one-way and evolved into a culture where everyone contributed.

Process Monitoring and Feedback Mechanism

For the process we initiated to thrive and succeed, regular tracking and feedback were essential. That’s why we conducted monthly evaluation sessions measuring the competency development of our QA teammates.

These evaluations:

• Were linked to pre-defined goals,
• Shed light on individual career development,
• Shaped action plans through data-driven insights.

Now we had a living process. Structures that renewed themselves at every stage and could reshape according to needs had become part of our organization. The contribution of QA to our organization became more visible. And thus, we strengthened the quality-focused mindset in strategic management.

Not Individual Successes, but Shared Achievements

This journey taught us one thing: Quality is not the success of an individual or a single team; it’s a culture created by people united around common goals.

Our QA teammates, who started at different levels, now speak the same quality language, learn from one another, and grow together. For us, quality is no longer a finish line — it’s a path we walk again in every sprint, in every project.

And the greatest achievement of this path is not just flawless products, but a team that believes in the same vision and grows together.

From QA Maturity to a Shared Quality Culture from Scratch: Hepsiburada’s Journey was originally published in hepsiburadatech on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.