Escaped Issues represent a crucial challenge in the feedback loops of testing. In the Testlio platform, these issues are identified when they bypass our standard testing procedures. As a result, we empower both our clients and service delivery coordinators to highlight these overlooked problems. It's essential to note that the process for addressing Escaped Issues in the Testlio platform is distinct from that of routine issues reported by freelancers or clients during their testing efforts. In our system, Escaped Issues are documented, monitored, and managed separately.
Why Report Escaped Issues
Once Testlio knows about any Escaped Issues, the team works hard to identify the
root cause and resolve it before it repeats. This helps keep issues with a similar
cause from entering your future critical releases. The sooner Testlio knows about
an issue that has escaped established processes, the sooner the processes can be fixed.
Software always contains issues that stay undiscovered throughout testing. It is
important to catch issues that matter before they pass a critical gate. That is where you can help by reporting any escaped issues you identify.
Report an Escaped Issue
If you have a Jira integration set up, the easiest way to report an Escaped Issue is to add the label testlio-escaped-issue to an issue in your issue management system. This automatically syncs the issue to the Testlio platform as an Escaped Issue.
Note that this only works if your integration syncs labels from your Jira instance into Testlio. It does not work for issues originally created by Testlio. To ensure your configuration is working, check with your Engagement Manager.
Report Escaped Issues in the Testlio Platform
In the Testlio platform, click Issues and then click New Escaped Issue.
You are offered fields with key information to fill in.
You can report an escaped issue with these basic fields:
Field | Required? | Explanation |
Title | Required | A brief title of the escaped issue in the |
Description |
| A detailed description of the issue including any applicable links or reference information (if possible, attach the email [without disclosing PII] or screenshots of communication). |
Found Date | Required | The date the issue occurred and came to be known to the customer. Found and reported dates are distinguished to understand the delay it takes to notify Testlio. |
Reported Date |
| The date the escaped issue was reported to Testlio. |
Link to issue |
| URL reference to the same escaped issue in an external system. Use the full URL ( |
Attach file |
| Optional field to collect reference materials, such as recordings, logs. |
Advanced Details about Escaped Issues
Advanced details offer the chance to add more information to resolve and close an escaped issues. Some fields must be filled in before an Escaped Issue can be closed but none are required to open an Escaped Issue.
Explanation of Drivers
Category | Driver | General Source | Description |
Process Integration | Limited Coverage | Client/Testlio | Devices, locations, languages, and/or other aspects of coverage were not tested, because of: 1) scope/budget; 2) a decision based on focus; and 3) a misunderstanding. |
Process Integration | Build Delivery | Client | The customer provided an unanticipated or problematic build (including a web environment). Can include building access and sample data problems. Also includes lack of build receipt. |
Process Integration | Issue Escalation | Client/Testlio | Issues discovered were not clearly presented to the correct action source. |
Process Integration | Issue Remediation | Client | Issues were not resolved sufficiently before the production release. |
Test Preparation | Team Onboarding | Client/Testlio | Testers, Coordinators, Scripters, and/or other participants were not sufficiently skilled, trained, or equipped to perform key tasks. This can include poor selection decisions. |
Test Preparation | Testing Instructions | Client/Testlio | The Run Instructions, Test Case, and/or other directions were problematic. This can include missing tests. |
Test Preparation | Testing Methodology | Testlio | Testing techniques (e.g. functional v exploratory, positive v negative) were poorly selected, badly designed, and/or weakly implemented. |
Testing Execution | Insufficient Testing | Tester | Unintentional missed issue. Tester did the work by following instructions but did not "see" the issue, potentially because of fatigue, misunderstanding, miscommunication, limited time, or other problems. |
Testing Execution | Misaligned Testing | Tester | The tester did not follow the instructions given in the task potentially due to lack of attention, sloppiness, or other factors, resulting in a wrong testing setup or incorrect testing scenarios. |
Testing Execution | Misrepresented Testing | Tester | Intentional breach of Freelancer Agreement. Tester knowingly misrepresented their work (e.g. false passes), location, equipment, skills, time, or other factors (can include tester subcontracting work to someone else and/or parallel testing). |
Close an Escaped Issue
Once an escaped issue is recorded and remediation completed, then closing the issue follows the same model as the regular issue. When closing issues, ensure that all required fields are completed and if possible, also collect optional data fields for greater impact on future testing loops and learnings.