Balanced Approach: Software Testing

It might feel difficult for few of us to consume, but quality/test engineers are as much an integral part of a solution development ecosystem, as anyone else. Also, I assume it is safe to believe, that most of the product development companies have grown and matured in their view on testing. This is purely based on my experience that I have had in recent past. As much it is true for developers to evolve and adapt to ever changing technology, it is equally important, if not more, for QE/TE's to be a part of this dynamics.

However, perceiving the market, I see some complex and troublesome strategies for testing at various organizations. With the progressive shift towards more of automation, some organizations strategically decide to focus only on automation, thereby letting their manual testers to quit. It is an ultimate necessity to understand that if we put all our emphasis on automation during test strategy, and if it means mostly doing automated checks and almost no manual testing, then we won’t find the unexpected. Good testing technique has to be a balanced one.

As soon as a development cycle is started, manual testing remains the only option available during initial phases (not denying the fact that we do have an option of writing unit tests for small individual blocks). Also, in process of developing a stable automation model, we have to introduce new blocks of code (which will contain errors and fail). An error filled automation script can be misinterpreted as functionality failure, OR the automation script can misinterpret an error as a correct functionality. So, it is always advisable to test the basic framework and critical functional blocks using manual testing (with no room for misinterpretation).

There is no denying the fact that automation leads to accuracy, cost savings, faster execution, and easier regressions. However, it takes some time before any automation tool reaches this level of stability. Cost involved for setting up, building and executing the automation framework can be much higher initially as compared to manual option.

Also, a major set of our manual test cases are simple to be interpreted and executed - as it is required to follow the steps in test case creation and comparing/checking/validating the generated results to be consistent. Automation testing on the other hand, requires a bit of programming skills as well as basic understanding of test designing.

It is totally understandable that need for increased test coverage across range of products has made test automation increasingly important. Only concern is - with test automation growing and evolving at a steady pace, we should not be forgetting the advantages of manual testing - as it still has a lot to offer which automation cannot. Only appreciating the value of both approaches will help us gain confidence and stability in solutions we deliver. So, it is absolutely critical to maintain the right equilibrium between the two.