In my experience the software engineers that often get promoted crank out as many features as possible with almost no regard to the defect rate. If you do things at a more deliberate pace, you can be regarded by product or management as slow and unproductive. Real incentives exist in software development that push for quantity over quality.
This is not analogous to the failure of an anesthesiologist to properly sedate a patient. This is a process failure. Clearly the proper amount of QA was not in place for whatever reason and they need to re-examine their approach. Of course their process needs extra diligence given the cost of failure.
It would be a real shame if an individual is punished for this instead of examining the process and system of incentives that led to this failure.
In my experience the software engineers that often get promoted crank out as many features as possible with almost no regard to the defect rate. If you do things at a more deliberate pace, you can be regarded by product or management as slow and unproductive. Real incentives exist in software development that push for quantity over quality.
This is not analogous to the failure of an anesthesiologist to properly sedate a patient. This is a process failure. Clearly the proper amount of QA was not in place for whatever reason and they need to re-examine their approach. Of course their process needs extra diligence given the cost of failure.
It would be a real shame if an individual is punished for this instead of examining the process and system of incentives that led to this failure.