Embedding QA doesn't dissolve the core QA team or anything like that. What embedding does is allow teams to have testers who know the ins and outs of that specific team (art, character, live services, etc) which allows them to be more efficient.
I've been worked at a few studios who use embedded QA where we still had our own team meetings, processes, and leadership. Doing this doesn't break QA up into smaller groups who can't work together or unionize. Based on my experience I feel that calling this union busting is a bit of a stretch.
The time is a bit weird yeah, but this is a practice more studios should be doing.
There is also some weird misunderstanding of the craft spilt here. Embedding people into teams does not mean you are removing an entire reporting and craft structure. On the contrary, you are giving them more visibility.
Embedded QA folks still have QA leads and managers to report to and likely would still report to a QA director. Just like how designers report to design leads and a design director, or level artists report to art leads and art directors, and so on.
It's a weird thing to call this a "splitting QA people apart". It also does not prevent them from forming unions, having QA specific team events, or organising anything that is QA craft specific.
The timing is deeply suspicious, but embedding some/all of QA into other departments is a fairly standard industry practice.
Just from my own experience, it also helps QA build expertise in the particular technical areas of the game (animation, physics, AI etc.), improving diagnosis of bugs, speeding up verification etc.
The only reorganization that happens with embedding testers is assigning them to team to work with directly for their day to day tasks. The QA group as a whole remains as their own entity with its own leadership and such.
This move appears to be less union busting and more "we'll make your work live somewhat easier please stop".
Yep, have seen many embedded QA folks move into positions that they directly worked with in a embedded model. Persistence QA people becoming persistence designers, art QA people becoming tech artists or level artists, and similar.
That would be incredibly more difficult if those people are QA person number 187.
I just wanted to quote you guys to second all of this. Embedded QA is absolutely a major benefit to the QA Testers and their vital role in the development process.
I also absolutely agree that the timing is suspicious, but I also know, from experience, that these sorts of moves aren't just decided on over night, and implemented the next day. It takes a lot of planning from studio heads, as well as individual department heads (including the QA director/manager), to formulate a plan on how to integrate embedded QA into their teams without disrupting any work flow or production pipelines. This is even harder during a global pandemic, when much, if not all, of the work force is working remotely.
But like I mentioned in my post above, being an embedded tester can open up many doors for the QA team that were closed to them when they were siloed off in their corner and forgotten about.
As someone who worked in QA for quite a few years, embedded QA is the right move long term for QA people within a dev team and creates paths to grow within a team, which is great.
With that said, the fact that Activision is moving on this right now is also a sign that they may be union busting as a side benefit and should be looked at with the appropriate amount of side eye.
Both can be true and it's completely fine to be cautious considering Activision and their checkered past with how they treat their workers.
Either way, hope the employees end up with secure jobs and happiness at the end of the day.
I think there is bias in that Kotaku clearly sympathizes with the workers more than management. A bias I can get behind.
However, even Kotaku notes that these changes aren't out of the ordinary, before questioning the timing and general motives of Activision. And I think that's absolutely fair of them to do.
I don't think there's anything wrong with not taking Activision at their word, considering they sent a letter to employees (written by a ex-Trump appointee) asking them to not unionize, and before that they hired a union-busting firm to work for them. Oh, and all the fucked up shit they did that led to this.
I think you made a fair point.
And the posters who say embedded QA is better for advancement into new positions aren't wrong, either--but it takes energy away from collective solidarity and moves it toward individualism.
I also wanted to quote you guys to say I agree with this as well. Call me biased, but I worked at ATVI for years as QA, and it was one of the most miserable experiences I've had in my nearly 20 year gaming industry career. However, if this move to embedded QA improves the lives of the QA team even a little, it's a positive. With that said, my hope is that the QA team at Raven continue to push for unionization, and don't let this QoL change deter them from fighting and seeking what they want/deserve.
Another thing I wanted to touch on was the idea that this move can break up solidarity. For some, it might, but from my experience, QA, as a whole, is a lot more close knit and unified than most departments. I've worked at many, many studios over the years, and the one thing they all had in common, was that the QA team had each other's backs, regardless of being embedded, promoted to other positions, or what have you. I remember at each new studio I'd QA at, me and the rest of the QA team would share "war stories" about our experiences in QA, and it was one of the things that bonded us. lol. Not to mention that the industry is very small, so a lot of us had either worked at the same companies in the past, or we used to work together at those same companies.
And embedded QA tester is still QA. They still report to their QA leads. They still have meetings and communication with the QA team. They aren't cut off from the rest of the QA team (at least from my experience).
When I was embedded QA, I still had my desk in the QA department that I worked at. I still had to attend every QA meeting (but also got to attend the design team meetings, and served as a sort of point of contact between QA and design). It wasn't until I was getting close to moving out of QA and into Design that I finally had my seating shifted to be with my new department. I still reported to my QA Lead, completed the QA tasks assigned to me by said lead (which were more tailored to my work with the Design department), but furthermore, I wasn't just arbitrarily assigned that department. I was assigned that department because my QA Lead knew of my aspirations to get into Design, and, being a supportive QA Lead, he worked with the leads of the Design team to, at the least, give me an opportunity to learn more about the Design department on top of performing my QA tasks, and the tasks that Design gave to me. The hope was that should an opportunity in design open up, I'd be in the best position to take advantage of that opportunity. Fortunately for me, we ended up having an opening in Design, and the design team was pleased with my work, so I got the promotion.
The point is, my job title was still QA. I still answered to QA, and I still stood by my QA team, even after I was promoted and left the team. The other QA members that eventually got promoted to other careers were the same way. We never "forgot our roots", or "where we came from," and our relationship with QA is still just as strong as it was when we were QA. Hell, before the pandemic and we started working from home, the studio would regularly have get togethers, events, parties, etc, where the whole studio (including QA), were included, which strengthened our solidarity even more, but also for the entire company and how they perceived QA.
The most frustrating thing about my first 14 years in this industry, was how cut off QA was from everyone else. We weren't included in anything, because we were "just contractors," and "not a 'real' part of the family." Any moves that can potentially tear down those barriers is a good thing. In the past, I couldn't have told you the names of people on the design team, or art team, or production team, or engineering team. Then I landed at the studio I'm still at now, and within days of starting, I was on a first name basis with everyone from the engineers to the CEO.
Obviously, not every publisher is the same, but it's been heartening to hear about more and more studios wising up to how awesome and vital QA is, and slowly but surely changing their mindset about QA. And, personally, I don't think any amount of QoL improvements is going to deter QA from getting treated with the respect and appreciation they deserve. I don't think the Raven QA team is going to be swayed by this change, and I hope that the leadership in charge of their unionization movements continues to push for them to keep fighting. Give them a bit more credit than that. If the armchair analysts on Resetera are greeting this news with a healthy amount of skepticism, you can rest assured that the people who's lives are actively affected by these actions are doing, and have done, the same.
Activision doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt in any way, shape, or form, but I'm going to count this as a win for the QA Team, and hope it continues to grow into more wins for them and they keep sticking to their guns.
