Handling Complexity in Testing - What's Your Slice?

I'm at the sixth article of this series, parts of which are overwhelming for me too. It's obvious. I am talking about theoretically infinite infinities everywhere for a tester. How do we embrace it? What do I mean by embracing infinity?

The First Step

Acknowledge that these infinities exist.

Pick any area of your testing work. Acknowledge the infinities that exist there. Compare it to what you have done so far.

If it tells you how little you know, this article series is for you.

In the absence of this humbling experience, in case you are still wearing the hat of an infallible "expert", if this does not blow your hats away - the acknowledgement has not happened. You need not read this or any other articles in this series any further for now, unless you are reading purely for critique.

The Second Step

Acknowledge that we are different. So, although there could be overlaps, we are dealing with different sets of infinities.

At this stage, you need to take a critical decision. Do you want to read any further?

Is your decision at this stage like a sponge or a sieve?

Both have their advantages at different points.

If you think like a sieve, you are more focused, it will also save you a lot of time as you will be reading and listening to only the things that closely map to what you need or your thinking style.

If you think like a sponge, you will be able to hear seemingly unrelated stuff, contradictions, opinions that you could hate/love/endorse/reject. Although much more rewarding in my opinion but it is a time consuming and confusing path.

If you have made a decision, read further accordingly.

The Sieve and The Sponge

How do we deal with infinity? How do we deal with complexity?

If you seek simple answers, you will get them. These answers often exist on the path of the sieve.

If you seek deeper, fuller answers, the approach is obviously more complex - an ever-changing combination of the Sponge and the Sieve. That's the path I choose to take.

I assume that good teachers make complex things easier and simpler. But that does not mean that the things themselves are that easy or simple. The bad side to this good thing is that students set this expectation for everything - if you want to teach me, teach in a simpler way (otherwise I am ok with not learning about it). The statement in the parenthesis is the hidden reality. I am not a good teacher I guess. I strive to be a good student of testing though - teach me a concept in the way you want to teach, I'll try to make sense of it myself. You can be my teacher without being an entertainer or translator.

I start with a focus subject. That's the sieve. Within the subject, I absorb from everywhere. That's the sponge. During the process, I find tangents that direct to other subject areas. That's the sponge too. At continuous intervals, I keep filtering what makes sense to me. That's the sieve. And so on. It works pretty well for me and is the basis of most of my body of work. For example, my idea of test encapsulation in test automation was born out of Sufism and object oriented programming put together.

Want to see Sponge and Sieve in practice?

It's simple. Check the comments in this series of articles. You will quickly observe the sieve and sponge in play - People acknowledging both sides of opinions with their likes, or talking clearly in the comments about especially their disagreements or the quality of the content, and then people who selectively like only one version of the story, without expressing why or engaging in the discussion.

Want more? Evaluate why click-bated posts by testing influencers work?

Still more? Look at the quality of testing discussions and how many of them end up being about exact meaning of words. If the understanding of the word does not match, the discussion does not advance. It's more of a loop of I am right, you are wrong and the other way round.

Do you see the rabbit or the duck? If you see a duck or a rabbit, can you unsee it to see the other? Can you consciously switch to see them both? How quick?

Further examples will lead to the nature of content, I've planned to stay away from as a conscious choice.

It's up to you

Do you want to take slices of a single infinity?

Do you have time, intention and motivation to manage slices of multiple infinities and make sense of them for yourself?

As I said earlier, both are ok. My thinking style is of the second kind. You have been warned :-) and/or informed.

That's all for now.

Note: I am not being rude or impolite when I say "you need not read any further". I am empathetic to the fact that my writing does not appeal to everyone, rather it would appeal only to a few minds - that too partially. I've got neither any universal truth to share with you nor a universal way of teaching to make sense of it. What I've got are the raw details.

Previous articles in this series:

20 Years of Contradictions

Pluralism and the Infinite Testing Schools

The Infinity Model of Imperfect Quality for Fallible Testers

An Undefinition - What is a Test?

AEIOU - The Vowel Model of Thinking for Pluralistic Testing

The Ambidexterity Continuum of Testing