Skip to main content

Testers are Gate-Crashers

 

The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book, Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester, which aims to provide responses to common questions and statements about testing from a context-driven perspective.

It's being edited by Lee Hawkins who is posing questions on Twitter,  LinkedIn, Mastodon, Slack, and the AST mailing list and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory.

I've decided to contribute by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be.

Perhaps you'd like to join me?

 --00--

"Testers are the gatekeepers of quality"

Instinctively I don't like the sound of that, but I wonder what you mean by it. Perhaps one or more of these?

Testers set the quality standards for a product.

Testers make the final decision on whether a product ships.

Testers choose how to trade quality off against other concerns.

I can see from your face that I'm not quite capturing what's in your head? Remember that gatekeeping is binary. While the gate can sit on the fence, the keeper has to choose: in or out.

Yes, I suppose that does sound like testers having control over business decisions. And, yes, I'm sure you're right, nobody wants that. I have another suggestion, though!

Testers are responsible for the quality of a product.

OK, you guessed that I threw that one in for a laugh! You're not high enough up the greasy pole to believe that kind of responsibility can legitimately come without a corresponding  sackful of authority, resource, and budget. 

And, to be fair to you, I know you think that everyone has a role to play in making a product at the level of quality the company wants.

We could go on like this, and it would be fun, but I know you're busy so perhaps you had something more like this in mind?

Testers assess whether a product meets quality standards ...

You like that one? Less gatekeepers and more box-tickers for you, then, with someone else to decide whether a customer gets the thing yesterday, today, next week, or never. But I hadn't quite finished:

... arrived at through collaboration ...

I'm feeling that you're less sure about this one now, but we've already agreed that the compromise between quality and other factors is a business decision. And in any case there's more:

... in line with whatever time and resource budgets have been agreed.

Ah, you're back onside now! Yes, I thought this was where you were at. You've told me many times that the price of perfect is prohibitive. 

While this is certainly within the scope of a testing role for me, it isn't quite the Gatekeeper of Quality is it? It also massively undersells the wide range of benefits that a good tester can bring to an organisation by opening or even crashing through gates rather than standing next to them.
Image: https://flic.kr/p/4MieTg

Comments

  1. As always you put us in our place with your writing, while giving us insight and inspiration to work better at our testing and reporting what we find more clearly James.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cheers, Conrad! It's not my intention to put anyone in their place but I'm very happy to be an inspiration for better testing.

      Delete
  2. [[..Pingback..]]
    This article was curated as a part of #88th Issue of Software Testing Notes Newsletter.
    https://softwaretestingnotes.substack.com/p/issue-88-software-testing-notes
    Web: https://softwaretestingnotes.com

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Testing (AI) is Testing

Last November I gave a talk, Random Exploration of a Chatbot API , at the BCS Testing, Diversity, AI Conference .  It was a nice surprise afterwards to be offered a book from their catalogue and I chose Artificial Intelligence and Software Testing by Rex Black, James Davenport, Joanna Olszewska, Jeremias Rößler, Adam Leon Smith, and Jonathon Wright.  This week, on a couple of train journeys around East Anglia, I read it and made sketchnotes. As someone not deeply into this field, but who has been experimenting with AI as a testing tool at work, I found the landscape view provided by the book interesting, particularly the lists: of challenges in testing AI, of approaches to testing AI, and of quality aspects to consider when evaluating AI.  Despite the hype around the area right now there's much that any competent tester will be familiar with, and skills that translate directly. Where there's likely to be novelty is in the technology, and the technical domain, and the effect of

Can Code, Can't Code, Is Useful

The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn , Mastodon , Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "If testers can’t code, they’re of no use to us" My first reaction is to wonder what you expect from your testers. I am immediately interested in your working context and the way

Am I Wrong?

I happened across Exploratory Testing: Why Is It Not Ideal for Agile Projects? by Vitaly Prus this week and I was triggered. But why? I took a few minutes to think that through. Partly, I guess, I feel directly challenged. I work on an agile project (by the definition in the article) and I would say that I use exclusively exploratory testing. Naturally, I like to think I'm doing a good job. Am I wrong? After calming down, and re-reading the article a couple of times, I don't think so. 😸 From the start, even the title makes me tense. The ideal solution is a perfect solution, the best solution. My context-driven instincts are reluctant to accept the premise, and I wonder what the author thinks is an ideal solution for an agile project, or any project. I notice also that I slid so easily from "an approach is not ideal" into "I am not doing a good job" and, in retrospect, that makes me smile. It doesn't do any harm to be reminded that your cognitive bias

Test Now

The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn , Mastodon , Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "When is the best time to test?" Twenty posts in , I hope you're not expecting an answer without nuance? You are? Well, I'll do my best. For me, the best time to test is when there

README

    This week at work my team attended a Myers Briggs Type Indicator workshop. Beforehand we each completed a questionnaire which assigned us a personality type based on our position on five behavioural preference axes. For what it's worth, this time I was labelled INFJ-A and roughly at the mid-point on every axis.  I am sceptical about the value of such labels . In my less charitable moments, I imagine that the MBTI exercise gives us each a box and, later when work shows up, we try to force the work into the box regardless of any compatiblity in size and shape. On the other hand, I am not sceptical about the value of having conversations with those I work with about how we each like to work or, if you prefer it, what shape our boxes are, how much they flex, and how eager we are to chop problems up so that they fit into our boxes. Wondering how to stretch the workshop's conversational value into something ongoing I decided to write a README for me and

A Qualified Answer

The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn ,   Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "Whenever possible, you should hire testers with testing certifications"  Interesting. Which would you value more? (a) a candidate who was sent on loads of courses approved by some organisation you don't know and ru

ChatGPT Whoppers

Over Christmas I thought I'd have a look at ChatGPT . Not to "break" it, or find more examples of its factual incorrectness , but to explore it sympathetically, for fun. And it was fun. In particular, the natural language generation and understanding capabilities of the system are really impressive. However, even without trying it's not hard to expose weaknesses in the tool. So much so that I doubt I would have bothered to blog about what I found, except that I enjoyed the accidental semantic connection between a handful of my observations. I asked for ASCII art to celebrate my 600th blog post on software testing and got this whopper! . .: :: :; ;: .;; .;;: ::;: :;;: ;;;:

Farewell AST

After four years, three of them as Vice President, I'm standing down from the board of the Association for Software Testing . Let me say up front that I am an unapologetic romantic about my craft. (And, yeah , I called it a craft. Sue me.) I believe in what AST stands for, its mission , and in context-driven testing , so it's been an absolute privilege to be involved in running the organisation. It's also been fun, and full of difficult situations and choices, and hard work on top of family life and a day job. There also was the small matter of the global Covid pandemic to deal with. The immediate impact was on CAST, our annual conference , and in some ways the beating heart of the AST. We had to variously cancel, reschedule, and move CAST online and we are still experiencing the after-effects as we organise the 2023 in-person event . So why am I leaving? Well, first, I'm not leaving the organisation, only the board. I am a life member and

Having a Test.blast()

Last week I attended a meetup on API testing with Mark Winteringham . In it, he talked through some HTTP and REST basics, introduced us to Postman by making requests against his Restful Booker bed and breakfast application, and encouraged us to enter the Test.bash() 2022 API Challenge which was about to close. The challenge is to make a 20-minute video for use at the Ministry of Testing's October Test.bash() showing the use of automation to check that it's possible to create a room using the Restful Booker API. I talk and write about exploring with automation a lot (next time is 14th October 2022, for an Association for Software Testing webinar ) and I thought it might be interesting to show that I am not a great developer and spend plenty of time Googling, copy-pasting, and introducing and removing typos. So I did and my video is now available in the Ministry of Testing Dojo . The script I hacked during the video is up in GitHub . My