No matter you are working in agile or waterfall projects, entry & exit criteria -and even acceptance criteria- are a crucial part of our test strategy. These criteria define the conditions to be met before we start testing or before deciding to go to the next phase.
In our goal to make them as objective as possible, testers often lose themselves in defining too long lists with entry & exit criteria.

In such case, criteria are often ignored and minimized by stakeholders, which leads to a lot of frustration at tester's side.

How can we change this and come up with a set of effective criteria? Consensus-based approaches are definitely the way forward. This presentation highlights some consensus-based techniques with an origin in the agile context. But if you adopt them slightly to a testing context, we can use them to get effective criteria. Illustrated with concrete examples, the audience will get the handles to apply them in their own context.

Most projects are struggling to define an approach when it comes to performance testing. 
However, performance matters! There are many examples of companies who have suffered from performance issues and have felt the impact on their brand, reputation and/or revenue.

Where do we stand with performance testing in agile projects? While we have embedded disciplines like development, analysis, functional testing in our agile projects, we are definitely not yet there for performance testing.

There are some obstacles below the iceberg, which block us from embracing and integrating performance testing like we should have to do. 
This presentation zooms in on three obstacles: non-functional requirements, planning and team organisation. 
For each problem, the challenges are described, and experience-based solutions are given to tackle them. 
As a result, everyone working in an agile context will have the handles to start with performance testing and avoid a Titanic scenario.