Skip to main content

In the Danger Zone

Kenny Loggins said it best.

Last night I stepped right into the 'danger zone.' I attended a roundtable on testing arranged by a recruitment agency, surrounded by big financial services test management and even those representing 'big' consultancy, amongst others. I would not usually attend something like this to be honest, out of my usual bubble.

I have endeavoured this year to talk about testing at a range of events, whether they be non testing specific or as this occasion, an event which is outside of the sphere of my usual haunts. One of my prevailing feelings after a TestBash (for example) is that it was great but for the most part confirmed my world view.

Three questions were posed.
  1. What is the value of a tester?
  2. What are testers accountable for?
  3. What is your opinion on the future of testing?
I thought I would note what my response was for each. Here it is:



Also, for download:

http://www.xmind.net/m/YuK2

As there were three questions, I'll note my three takeaways from the session:
  1. We, as testers, often still talk about cost and not value. As in 'if this bug would have got through, it would have cost X' rather than 'the team delivered revenue generating feature with a value of Y.' Lets try more positive, team based language.
  2. The question 'should testers be embedded in teams?' was explored. My world has been exactly that for the last four or five years. It was a timely reminder that not all organisations value that arrangement, therefore the appreciation of a testers value by other disciplines is given less opportunity to grow.
  3. Community, specifically that which is external to organisations, is our key to moving testing forward. I note some of the debate recently about automation, while painful for some, is a great example of challenge, clarification and hopefully soon, understanding.
Attend something you might usually not. I believe it's worth it.

Comments

  1. This post is a good reminder that we don't all come from the same background and breaking out of the norm is a good thing. It lets us come back to the roots and reevaluate. I've done a similar thing recently. I wish you the best of luck in further exploring this!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wheel of Testing Part 2 - Content

Thank you Reddit, while attempting to find pictures of the earths core, you surpass yourself.
Turns out Steve Buscemi is the centre of the world.

Anyway. Lets start with something I hold to be true. My testing career is mine to shape, it has many influences but only one driver. No one will do it for me. Organisations that offer a career (or even a vocation) are offering something that is not theirs to give. Too much of their own needs get in the way, plus morphing into a badass question-asker, assumption-challenger, claim-demolisher and illusion-breaker is a bit terrifying for most organisations. Therefore, I hope the wheel is a tool for possibilities not definitive answers, otherwise it would just be another tool trying to provide a path which is yours to define.


In part one, I discussed why I had thought about the wheel of testing in terms of my own motivations for creating it, plus applying the reasoning of a career in testing to it. As in, coming up with a sensible reflection of real…

Getting started with testability

At TestBash Netherlands, I said that, in my experience, a lot of testers don't really get testability. I would feel bad if I didn't follow that up with a starting point for expanding your mindset and explicitly thinking about testability day to day, and making your testing lives better! 

In large scale, high transaction systems testability really is critical, as compared to the vastness and variability of the world, testing done within organisations, before deployment, is limited by comparison. We need ways to see and learn from the systems we test where it matters, in Production.
Being able to observe, control and understand is central to testing effectively, and there are loads of resources and experience reports out there to help. I was/am inspired by James Bach, Seth Eliot, Matt Skelton, Sally Goble, Martin Fowler and a little bit of PerfBytes/Logchat, so lets see if it works for you! 

Overall Model:

Heuristics of Software Testability by James Bach

http://www.satisfice.com/tool…

The Team Test for Testability

You know what I see quite a lot. Really long-winded test maturity models. 

You know what I love to see? Really fast, meaningful ways to build a picture of your teams current state and provoke a conversation about improvement. The excellent test improvement card game by Huib Schoots and Joep Schuurkes is a great example. I also really like 'The Joel Test' by Joel Spolsky, a number of questions you can answer yes or no to to gain insight into their effectiveness as a software development team.

I thought something like this for testability might an interesting experiment, so here goes:

If you ask the team to change their codebase do they react positively?Does each member of the team have access to the system source control?Does the team know which parts of the codebase are subject to the most change?Does the team collaborate regularly with teams that maintain their dependencies?Does the team have regular contact with the users of the system?Can you set your system into a given state…