Strategies of Software Testing, Not Schools
Here's a metaphorical question for you: Tanks are certain useful to the military, but have you ever heard of a country deciding that it would adopt a "tank-driven warfare" approach to defense? Of course not! Tanks are part of a blended strategy for defense, not a school of thought on warfare.
In software testing, though, a small but vocal group of testers talk about “schools of testing,” but do you have to belong to one? Or can you pick and choose appropriate testing strategies based on your project, organization, and team needs and priorities? In this webinar, Rex demonstrates how the “schools of testing” concept has actually limited our profession. In the place of this failed idea, Rex described a set of powerful testing strategies that can be customized and blended to create an effective, efficient, and fulfilling test approach. As always, Rex took questions after the webinar is over. Listen to the recorded webinar below to learn how to avoid the mental trap of the "schools of testing" idea. Free your mind to all the software testing strategies out there. Need more help adapting these strategies to your particular needs? Contact us.
I'm not sure that the tank analogy really works here - If you think about it, a tank is an armored gun. Here the tank takes the basic army offensive block - the gun, scales it up, blends it with transport and adds armour. If anything the tank itself is an example of blended technologies.
Technical Test Manager/lead for complex software products (cybersecurity, CAD, low code). Created and mentored test teams on par with the best. Public articles show my passion and thinking.
7 年I don't think we should continue making an issue with '4 schools'. There are fundamental differences in the approaches. It may be better to address them. I don't think it is a question of context. The CDT/AST group has made very strong contributions to software testing. I don't think that is matched by the other approaches. I also see that the CDT/AST has used/does use ideas from the other groups, e.g., test design ideas from the process based/ISTQB approach, test automation when appropriate and agile. However, I don't see the same from the other groups. They only give lip service to the ideas of CDT/AST. You can prove that wrong by providing a blog/talk/book from other groups which shows some depth in the ideas of CDT/AST. The reality also is that there is a big demand from the industry for the other three approaches. This in turn creates a demand for coaches, consultants, recruiters and vendors. This provides less incentive for each of these groups to change (not that there is any ulterior motive). The CDT approach is the most difficult to explain. That makes it difficult to be accepted in larger companies or in a corporate environment. I think the process based approach to testing has been unfairly targeted in the schools discussion. I find it equivalent to the agile/automation approaches. All three should have more depth in the CDT/AST type testing. At this time agile/automation is 'cool'. Unfortunately, that makes it the 'right ' approach. From the process based/ISTQB group, I would be interested in their ideas on test design, with real testing, e.g., https://www.dhirubhai.net/groups/55636/55636-6265899854095056900
Technology assessment and transformation for critical software products.
7 年I agree with Rex - the internecine notion of "schools" hasn't been helpful, with one possible exception - it does suggest that testing is not a one-dimensional activity, but is instead a composite of many useful strategies and techniques.
uQualio? - video training in the flow of work
7 年Nice colouring of the tanks. Did pass it my self more than once a few years back.
Consultant · Remediation Lead · Accessibility SME | LinkedIn Storyteller
7 年'Have you ever heard of a country deciding that it would adopt a "tank-driven warfare"?' - Yes. Blitzkrieg. Germany. Although that was an approach to offense. Can't win defending :)