I answered the survey, but my company's policy is 2:1. New projects sometimes end up 3:1 or 4:1 as people are being shuffled around to accommodate the new project, but the goal is always 2:1. This sucks during downtime but works well when there's a lot of active feature development going on.
Companies that have spun out of mine tend more towards 3:1 to keep QA personnel costs low, which I think is more in line with standards in my city.
I answered the survey, but my company's policy is 2:1. New projects sometimes end up 3:1 or 4:1 as people are being shuffled around to accommodate the new project, but the goal is always 2:1. This sucks during downtime but works well when there's a lot of active feature development going on.
Companies that have spun out of mine tend more towards 3:1 to keep QA personnel costs low, which I think is more in line with standards in my city.
Thanks, so that does seem roughly inline what we have going on at the moment then.