ScienceSoft and an anonymised omnichannel retailer: Ecommerce platform functional testing case analysed

Verdict: what is checkable

The evidence grade (this site's label for how a case is sourced: primary with client or press confirmation, secondary when vendor-hosted only.) is secondary: the only source is the vendor's own page; the case publishes no metric, so nothing in it can be checked as a figure. [ev-1376]

Client profile as published

Client
a multi-industry company running chains of gas stations, roadside diners, gardening centers, as well as retail and wholesale stores nationwide (the vendor's description; the vendor does not name the client)
Segment
Enterprise omnichannel
Region
not stated in the source
Channels
stores and ecommerce
Size indicators
chains of gas stations, roadside diners, gardening centers, as well as retail and wholesale stores nationwide

The client description and size indicators are quoted from the source; segment, region and channels are this site's classification. [ev-1376]

Systems in scope

  • Ecommerce platform: named in the Challenge section (new B2C e-store alongside the existing online B2B store); platform not named
  • Integrations: named in the Challenge section ("The new B2C e-store had to be integrated with the Customer’s ERP system") and in the Solution section (integration testing of ERP request handling from both e-stores)

Where the source names each system is quoted or summarised from the case page. [ev-1376]

Problem as stated

The client ran an ERP, a BI module and a B2B online store. To widen trade it added a B2C e-store for individual buyers, which had to work with the ERP while the B2B store kept running. During the project, a legal change that made electronic invoices obligatory from July 2016 added a new ERP block for creating, signing and storing invoices, which also had to be tested. [ev-1376]

the old B2B store remained fully functional (quoted from the source)

Approach

Testing types
functional (main scope: functional)
Team shape
not stated
Duration
not stated
Engagement model
not stated
Tooling named in the source
Atlassian JIRA, VMWare Workstation, MS Analysis Services, Mindjet Mind Manager, SQL Server Management Studio, SQL Server Reporting Services, .NET, C#, Perforce

Metrics claimed

The case publishes no metric.

What the case does not say

  • Baseline before the engagement.
  • Measurement method.
  • Duration over which the metric held.
  • Team size on both sides.
  • Cost.
  • What was out of scope.
  • Whether the client is still a client.

Reading notes for a buyer

This case speaks to the scenario “First outsourced QA team for a mid-size retailer” and feeds dimension D2 (Retail system coverage) of the methodology. A question to put to ScienceSoft:

Which order and checkout flows between the consumer e-store and the ERP did regression cover, and how many test cases did it hold? [ev-1376]

Source and verification

Source
Testing of a B2C Ecommerce Solution for a Multi-Industry Company - Case Study
Published
not dated by the vendor
Verified
2026-10-30
Evidence grade
secondary
Corroborating sources
none found
Evidence records for this case.
IdClaimSourceClassGradePublishedVerified
ev-1376Testing of a B2C Ecommerce Solution for a Multi-Industry CompanyTesting of a B2C Ecommerce Solution for a Multi-Industry Company - Case Studyvendor-case-studysecondary2026-10-30

Vendor profile: ScienceSoft. System facet: Ecommerce platform testing vendors.

Positions on this page are computed from the methodology published at /methodology/ and from the evidence records linked on this page. Case study figures are the vendor's or the client's claims as published at the linked source; the "verifiable" column states what this site could check. The site does not recommend vendors, does not accept paid placement and does not publish rates. Last computed: 2026-11-03.

Published by the editor of retailqavendors.com. Last reviewed .