Quality doesn’t collapse overnight. It drifts. It drifts in the seams between teams, in the silence between a feature being built and a feature being tested, in the gap between what we meant to cover and what we actually did. That drift is often invisible. Until it isn’t. That’s why testing can’t live in a corner of the organization. It has to be democratized, distributed, and deliberately practiced. And if we’re serious about doing that, we need ways to see the drift before it becomes damage. Let’s dig in!
Category: Testing
Using Narratives to Sharpen Testing Skills
As testers, we spend much of our time reviewing requirements, specifications, and user stories. We’re looking for ambiguities, inconsistencies, and contradictions. However, these analytical muscles can be exercised anywhere, including in narrative fiction. Let’s dig in!
Testing Has Something To Do With Mass Extinction
Okay, I’ll admit my title is a bit of click-bait. The better title would be “Testing Has Something To Do With Paleontology” but even that would not be correct since what I really would have to say is “Testing Has Something To Do With Paleontological Debates About Mass Extinctions in the Fossil Record.” Ugh. Even worse. You know what, let’s just dig in. (Pun slightly intended.)
Continue reading Testing Has Something To Do With Mass Extinction
The Quality Constant: Think and Act Experimentally
I was asked what one piece advice I have that I would give to testers starting out in the industry. It had to just be one piece of advice. It’s an interesting challenge.
Continue reading The Quality Constant: Think and Act Experimentally
Nothing to Do with Testing?
You will hear a certain segment of people say things like “TDD has nothing to do with testing” or “automation has nothing to do with testing.” This is often an ill-framed argument. Let’s talk about why this matters.
Testers, Code and Automation, Part 3
Working in our hypothetical developer-tester context over the last two posts, we’ve done some good work. We have a working implementation and we have some tests. Here we’ll finish up the work and close with some thoughts on the journey.
Testers, Code and Automation, Part 2
This post will continue from the first post. Here I’ll continue the exploration of testers interacting and intersecting with code, while making sure to consider good test and code practices.
Testers, Code and Automation, Part 1
There is much talk out there about whether testers should learn code. There is even more talk out there about automation. What there isn’t, at least so far as I can see, is much that shows actual examples that break down some concepts, particularly for testers entering the field. Here’s one of my attempts.
Scrutinize, Stabilize, Sustain
A lot of talk in the testing industry still focus on that divide between “automation” and “manual testing.” A lot of talk also focuses around how much and to what extent developers do testing. Here I want to provide a short post that indicates what I’ve done in my career, either as an individual contributor, a manager of teams, or a director.
Reframing Testing Arguments
I was giving a presentation to developers as well as engineering hiring managers who make decisions around hiring test practitioners. This came about regarding recent decisions in hiring, or rather, lack thereof. Brought up to me numerous times was the idea that testers are not being hired if they even hinted at the idea of testing as distinct from checking. So let’s talk about this.
The Social Dimension of Testing
I’ve talked in the past about my perception that specialist testers need to be cross-discipline associative. And while I’ve implicitly given some ideas about what that means in various posts, here I want to be a bit more explicit.
What Actually Is Testing?
One thing that’s often interesting is to define foundational terms within your discipline. It’s often even more interesting when you come across a discipline that seems to struggle with doing so. Is that the case for testing? Well, let’s talk about it.
My Role as Quality and Test Specialist
I often frame whatever role I’m in as a Quality and Test Specialist. It’s not really a term or phrase that our industry agrees upon. Normally people want the word “Engineer” somewhere in their title as if that term somehow wasn’t terribly vague. So let’s dig in to what I mean when I talk about being a specialist.
The Very Idea of Test Cases
Most testers are aware of the idea of a “test case.” What people outside of testing often don’t know is how much debate can swirl around what a test case is or should be. I think it’s great to have discussions about this kind of thing but I also find that there can be a temptation to either simplify it too much or complicate it too much.
The Abstract Battle for Irrelevancy
An interesting discussion came up on LinkedIn recently regarding the idea of whether automated tools “find bugs” and I actually found the discussion around this to be exactly what is wrong with a lot of our testing industry these days. I find testers are fighting more abstract battles and become less relevant as they do so. But maybe I’m the one that’s wrong on that? Possibly! Let’s dig in.
Creating Explanations: The Ethos of Testing
A couple of years ago I talked about what I considered to be the basis of testing. I very confidently asserted things. Maybe I sounded like an authority. Maybe I sounded like I was presenting a consensus. But did I really talk about the basis or just a basis? And shouldn’t an ethos have been part of that basis?
Continue reading Creating Explanations: The Ethos of Testing
The Economics, Value and Service of Testing
Among the many debates testers have, one of those is whether it makes sense to write tests down. Sometimes this is framed, simplistically, as just writing down “test cases” and, even more simplistically, as a bit of orthodoxy around how you don’t write tests, you perform tests. So let’s dig into this idea a little bit because I think this seemingly simple starting point for discussion leads into some interesting ideas about what the title of this post indicates.
Continue reading The Economics, Value and Service of Testing
Exploring, Bug Chaining and Causal Models
Here I’ll go back to a game I talked about previously and show some interesting game bugs, all of which came out of exploration and where the finding of one bug guided exploration to finding others, which led to some causal mapping. Of course, the idea of “bug chaining” and “causal mapping” is certainly valid in any context, not just games. But games can certainly make it a bit more fun!
The Emic and Etic in Testing
There’s an interesting cultural effect happening within the broader testing community. I’ve written about this before, where my thesis, if such it can be called, has been that a broad swath of testers are using ill-formed arguments and counter-productive narratives in an attempt to shift the thinking of an industry that they perceive devalues testers above all else. This has led to a needlessly combative approach to many discussions. In this post I want to approach this through a couple of parallel lenses: that of game studies, linguistics, and anthropology. That will lead us to insider (emic) and outsider (etic) polarities. It’s those polarities that I believe many testers are not adequately shifting between.
A History of Automated Testing
What I want to show in this post is a history where “teaching” and “tutoring” became linked with “testing” which became linked with “programmed instruction” which became linked with “automatic teaching” and thus “automatic testing.” The goal is to show the origins of the idea of “automating testing” in a broad context. Fair warning: this is going to be a bit of a deep dive.