Your team is divided on automated testing frameworks. How can you navigate conflicting opinions effectively?

Proof of concept (POC) is crucial. You need to present sufficient metrics to demonstrate why your chosen approach is more reliable for automation framework development. Additionally, compare these metrics with other approaches and provide clear visuals highlighting where your approach excels. This is the most effective way to get your ideas approved.

Start by listening to the team members and inviting them to share their opinions. Clearly communicate the project's objective and goals. Develop criteria to objectively evaluate different frameworks. Conduct a proof of concept (POC) in smaller groups to assess how each framework fits into the project's larger scheme, considering factors like acceleration, scale, stability, maintenance, and ease of use. Gather feedback from cross-functional teams on the POCs, and clearly communicate the chosen framework and the rationale behind the decision. Provide training to build team knowledge on the selected framework. Review and adapt periodically based on the results.

It always challenging when you have a team of resources worked with different tech stack in the past. It will be like very difficult to convince with tech stack which is required for the project. We have to conclude the framework with a proper analysis of what will the right solution for the project. Once the team understand the benefits of the tools and tech stack it would be simple to convince the engineering team.

Not just #POC, but implement some critical #E2E flows and show value added by #test #automation. One which add more value can be selected. Better you make a checklist which we can refer.

To navigate conflicting opinions on automated testing frameworks, consider the following steps: Understand the perspectives: Clarify each team member's concerns and goals to identify common ground. Evaluate frameworks: Research and compare the frameworks, focusing on their strengths and weaknesses. Prioritize: Determine the most critical testing needs and align the chosen framework with those needs. Collaborate: Involve all team members in the decision-making process to ensure everyone is invested in the chosen framework. Monitor and adapt: Continuously evaluate the chosen framework and adjust as needed to ensure it meets the team's evolving needs.

This depends upon company budget. First understand the budget of company if no budget then start selecting the options from open source. If organisation has budget for tool then explore both the option. Let team present ideas for each tool and depend upon requirement choose the best suited option with everyone’s agreement.

Need to analyze the open source options and gauge their pros and cons. Need to compare these attributes with your current team competencies and project timelines.

Exploring all available options is essential when the team is divided. Take time to research and present a variety of automated testing frameworks with unique features and how much ROI we can leverage out of each or different frameworks.

Once we know why we are doing an automation task, second important point is to find out what will help us. This includes exploring automation frameworks, finding out which language will be more effective for the specific requirement, finding out resources to do the actual coding and testing the new / additions to the automation framework. An important point is to explore some open-source tools as well in order to save licensing costs.

Exploring each and every option is necessary. Understanding the perspective of each and every team member is important. There could always be an option available which is better than the previously considered options.

This is important, if only to determine where your team's capabilities lie. If you choose a framework that none of your team has familiarity with, you may be sabotaging your own efforts.

This should be #1. If your team is divided and they have strong, conflicting opinions, then they have already formed their perspective on what the needs and options are and may have already used one or more automation testing frameworks. Those perspectives and experiences need to be expressed and discussed as a team. The entire team needs to understand they are all working towards a common goal and need to compromise and collaborate to do so. Otherwise, it's not a "team."

Once you and your team explores different tools, this is the best time to gather on a table and put all the pros and cons of each of the explored tools and have brainstorming sessions on which one is more suitable for the team/goal. These brainstorming sessions will be very helpful in finding out future blockers just by hypothetically imagining the tool. Once the team indulge in an open dialogue, and once they make a collective choice, they will be more comfortable working on the tool in future. Hence this step is an important one.

Open Discussions: Facilitate open discussions where team members can express their opinions, concerns, and experiences with various frameworks. Encourage Inclusivity: Ensure that all voices are heard, especially those who may have practical experience with the frameworks under consideration.

Pilot testing is highly beneficial. It provides early feedback, ensuring new features align with user expectations and fulfill their intended purpose. Additionally, it reduces risk by allowing time to assess and make necessary changes before full-scale release. This proactive approach helps ensure a smoother and more successful deployment.

Hands-On Evaluation: Pilot testing allows your team to get hands-on experience with each framework, providing a clear understanding of its features, strengths, and weaknesses. Team Feedback: Collecting feedback from team members who use the frameworks during the pilot phase helps gauge ease of use, learning curve, and overall satisfaction.

Pilots can be a life-saver. This would take time initially but often prove to be huge return-on-investment. I would rather invest some time initially into developing POCs. But don't do them for name sake. Try to find out the complex problems that could rise later in the project (this comes back to knowing the product and tech stack well) and then develop pilots that help in making a decision.

Once your requirements are precise, goals are defined, and measuring metrics are developed, the next step is to create a thorough and in-depth POC. To achieve that, pilot testing should be done. Take a small, non-dynamic and more stable part of your application. Applying multiple frameworks will give you different result data to map to your goals and KPIs. The measuring metrics you developed will help you accurately evaluate each framework's pilot test result. This approach will give you quick feedback, remove uncertainty about multiple tools, and help the team gain invaluable knowledge about what is out there and which one is for them.

Next is to actually deploy the shortlisted tools and het the hands dirty to find out the theoretical vs practical difference in the selected tools. The pilot testing of the selected tools will help identifying the right one. In one of my experience, we found out that the tool was excellent but its support team was unresponsive which helped us deciding a better one which had a prompt support team which further helped us post deployment as well.

Document the POC work on various options and finally initiate a team dialogue over the pros and cons. Have a collaborative session with own as well as dependent teams too before reaching a conclusion

Now as we have discussed, deployed, tried out some items, this is the time to decide which one we should go ahead with. Below are some points to consider - Cost of ownership - Ease of use - End of life cycles of the chosen tool - End of life cycles of the product for which we are targeting automation - Availability of resources (human as well as machines) - Product Support and turnaround time on the tickets if opened

Once you receive the results of the pilot test phase and map them to your requirements and goals, the decision-making process should be straightforward. If there are still some conflicts, it depends upon the leadership style. I usually take a majority vote and implement stuff because of my goal-oriented nature. Still, I also go a step forward to ensure that I do not alienate those resources who lost the decision.

Decision should be made only after hearing exploring every option available. Decision made should be precise and effective. It should benefit the project.

Collaborative Decision-Making: Use the insights gained from discussions and pilot testing to make a collaborative decision. Ensure that the decision process is transparent and based on data. Consensus Building: Aim for a consensus or at least a majority agreement. Address any remaining concerns and ensure that all team members are on board with the final decision.

The good thing about engineering community is most people do keep an open mind on new tools and ways to improve efficiency. Those who don’t tend to get left behind. I would recommend instill a mindset of ‘what and how can I learn from this experience.’ Into your team’s culture Instead of ‘who’s wrong.’ There’s no ‘absolute best answer’. There’s only ‘the best possible answer as of today.’

Training and Support: Provide training sessions and resources for the chosen framework to ensure that all team members are comfortable and proficient with it. Feedback and Iteration: Regularly review the effectiveness of the chosen framework and be open to making adjustments if necessary. Encourage continuous learning and adaptation.

Check what the developers use - they might already have what you need. They will certainly have ideas. There is huge benefit to that test tools synergy between dev and test.