SHIFT ASIA and an anonymised online retailer: EC-Cube 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; of 3 metrics, 0 are verifiable yes, 0 partial and 3 no. [ev-1778]
Client profile as published
- Client
a development agency offering tailored eCommerce solutions for businesses in Japan and Vietnam
(the vendor's description; the vendor does not name the client)- Segment
- Ecommerce and D2C (direct to consumer: a brand that sells its own products online to shoppers without a retailer in between.)
- Region
- India and APAC
- Channels
- ecommerce
- Size indicators
- none given
The client description and size indicators are quoted from the source; segment, region and channels are this site's classification. [ev-1778]
Systems in scope
- Ecommerce platform (EC-Cube): named in the Tools section ("E-commerce Platforms: EC-Cube, Shopify")
- Ecommerce platform (Shopify): named in the Tools section ("E-commerce Platforms: EC-Cube, Shopify")
Where the source names each system is quoted or summarised from the case page. [ev-1778]
Problem as stated
The client builds and runs online stores for businesses. It had no defined quality process, defects surfaced late during acceptance, and its documentation was inconsistent. The result was delays, lost trust with its own customers and lost accounts. [ev-1778]
which led to the loss of important accounts(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
- Redmine, CAT system
Metrics claimed
| Metric | Value | Unit | Claimed by | Verifiable | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| identified defectsvendor claim, outside the typical range in this data set | 400 | % | vendor | no | ev-1779 |
| testing timeline | from six weeks to three weeks | weeks | vendor | no | ev-1780 |
| project delivery times | in half | project delivery times | vendor | no | ev-1780 |
What the case does not say
- 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.
- Date of the work.
Reading notes for a buyer
This case speaks to the scenario “First outsourced QA team for a mid-size retailer” and feeds dimension D1 (Retail case study evidence) of the methodology. A question to put to SHIFT ASIA:
How were identified defects counted before and after the work, and over what period was the reported rise measured? [ev-1778]
Source and verification
- Source
- Case Study: SHIFT ASIA's QA Solution to transform eCommerce quality processes for success
- Published
- not dated by the vendor
- Verified
- 2026-10-30
- Evidence grade
- secondary
- Corroborating sources
- none found
| Id | Claim | Source | Class | Grade | Published | Verified |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ev-1778 | Case Study: SHIFT ASIA's QA Solution to transform eCommerce quality processes for success | Case Study: SHIFT ASIA's QA Solution to transform eCommerce quality processes for success | vendor-case-study | secondary | 2026-10-30 | |
| ev-1779 | Increased Issue Detection: The number of identified defects rose by 400% through rigorous functional and ad-hoc testing. | Case Study: SHIFT ASIA's QA Solution to transform eCommerce quality processes for success | vendor-case-study | secondary | 2026-10-30 | |
| ev-1780 | Testing timelines were reduced from six weeks to three weeks, cutting project delivery times in half. | Case Study: SHIFT ASIA's QA Solution to transform eCommerce quality processes for success | vendor-case-study | secondary | 2026-10-30 |
Vendor profile: SHIFT ASIA. 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 .