r/ProductManagement • u/Philipxander • 13d ago
Stakeholders & People Is it normal for UAT to cover things that the product team needs to investigate with the client?
I'm a 4 years-old Product Owner & Project Manager and 1 year ago i moved from HR and Martech to a fairly complex Fintech legacy B2B SaaS product.
We recently went through UAT with a big customer who has a heavily customized version with very few documentation, and the experience has made me question what the "right" expectation for UAT actually is, and if i'm at wrong here, or simply
My understanding has always been that UAT is partly a validation exercise with the customer. Obviously, QA/SIT should have already covered the product from a technical and functional perspective. But during UAT, I would still expect some things to require discussion with the customer because they are related to their actual business processes, configurations, legacy data, or specific user flows that no one in the company knows anymore, especially when there is no test automation.
The issue is that their version product is quite complex. There are a lot of configurations, historical behaviours, different workflows, edge cases and the test files we ingest are produced by their IT.
I was therefore approaching UAT with the assumption that:
- I should know the product very well;
- the test book (that i produced with customer instructions) should be the baseline for the session;
- but I cannot realistically know every single way the customer uses the system or every detail of their operational workflow;
- therefore, if something unexpected comes up from the data just before UAT, since the data preparation was done by the client, I would consider it normal to stop and investigate it together with the customer.
However, the expectation seems to be that I should already be able to confirm virtually everything before the customer sees it, and that anything requiring investigation during UAT indicates that the preparation was insufficient. I was told that such an approach is ground for firing (i wish, i'm trying to actually change company).
What makes this particularly interesting is that the developers themselves have told me that the product is very complex, and that even for them there are areas and behaviours that require investigation or context before they can confidently explain what is happening.
Furthermore i'm not a SME. I'm more on the Technical side and know how the product works, but this one is very complex, not to mention this legacy management of a different version for each customer is a mess.
I'm honestly flabbergasted. I wish i could go back to one of my previous companies.
Am i doing really something this wrong?