When there are a very large number of logged defects, which criteria should a tester use first to decide which defects to fix or address with highest priority?

Introduction / Context:
In large software systems, it is common to have many reported defects, especially during intensive test phases. It is rarely possible or necessary to fix every single defect before release. Instead, teams must prioritise. Testers, developers, and product owners collaborate to determine which bugs need immediate attention and which can be deferred. Understanding how to choose defects based on severity, business impact, and stakeholder priority is a key skill in practical quality assurance and is often explored in interview questions.

Given Data / Assumptions:
- The situation describes a very large number of defects, so prioritisation is essential.
- Severity measures technical impact, such as crashes, data loss, or major functional failures.
- Priority reflects business urgency, such as impact on key customers or regulatory requirements.
- Business impact combines severity with how the defect affects revenue, reputation, or legal obligations.

Concept / Approach:
When facing many defects, teams should not select issues randomly or solely based on ease of fixing. Instead, they should focus first on defects that seriously threaten system stability, safety, security, or key business processes. These are usually high severity defects. Stakeholder assigned priority then ensures that the most business critical issues are addressed early. Cosmetic issues or minor layout problems may be deferred, while defects causing data corruption, security breaches, or system crashes must be fixed quickly. Therefore, a correct answer must state that high severity and high impact defects with high priority need to be addressed first.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Recall that severity and business impact indicate how much damage a defect can cause to the system and users.Step 2: Remember that priority indicates the urgency of fixing the defect based on project and business needs.Step 3: Recognise that in a large defect list, critical crashes, data loss, and security issues must be handled before minor cosmetic problems.Step 4: Examine the options and look for one that emphasises high severity, strong business impact, and high stakeholder priority.Step 5: Choose option A because it correctly states that defects with highest severity and business impact, combined with high priority, should be addressed first.

Verification / Alternative check:
Imagine a release candidate with one million defects recorded. Among them, a few defects cause user data to be lost during payment processing, some cause the application to crash when opening important screens, and many are minor spelling mistakes or alignment issues. Fixing spelling errors first would not protect users from serious problems. The right approach is to fix the data loss and crash issues first, because they have high severity and high business impact. Product owners may also mark certain regulatory or legal issues as top priority even if they occur rarely. This example confirms that severity, impact, and priority should drive defect selection, as described in option A.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option B focuses only on ease of fixing, which may be tempting but does not align with risk based quality management. Option C gives cosmetic issues such as spelling errors more importance than functional or security problems, which is a poor strategy. Option D suggests random selection, which ignores available information about risk and impact. These options do not lead to rational, customer focused decisions in situations with many reported defects.

Common Pitfalls:
One pitfall is giving too much weight to visible cosmetic issues while underestimating backend or security defects that users may not report directly but which can have severe consequences. Another is failing to involve business stakeholders in setting priority, resulting in technical decisions that do not align with customer expectations. Teams should adopt transparent triage meetings where severity, impact, priority, and resource constraints are discussed openly. Documented triage rules help ensure consistent decisions across releases and maintain the trust of both customers and management.

Final Answer:
Correct answer: Focus first on defects with the highest severity and business impact, combined with high priority assigned by stakeholders