Author: Neil

It is interesting how test tools seem to move through cycles.  We mentioned in a previous post how many test tools were listing AI as their differentiator.  This year we seem to have encountered two different items:

Codeless – several test tools that have come to our attention recently are claiming to be codeless.  Either they are driven by capture of the transactions and generate a script from that capture or they use keywords to create a script.  Either way they seem to have removed the need to work at the scripting level.

Driven by a design – in a somewhat similar fashion they use a design or a diagram to drive the scripts and conceal the actual scripting again.

We have asked a few questions about these tools (the same ones that no doubt occurred to you)

1. How can they be modified (especially when dealing with changing requirements in a fluid project)?
2. How can they be maintained across several releases so that the investment is repaid (positive ROI)?
3. How can they be controlled (for those clients who need an auditable trail)?  Some of our clients would not be happy with just the actual scripts landing in a controlled repository. They would also want the script design keywords or diagram to be controlled as well.  This way they have the whole story.

We have received varying answers to these questions.  Some seem prepared, others do not.

Test Leader or Manager with concerns? Consider the Test Managers Conference.
NVP Quality Assurance Services
Contact us
Book a Meeting with NVP
LinkedIn Group
LinkedIn Company Page

Photo by Fleur on Unsplash

Another Quality Initiatives is also getting going and we want to discuss this one this week.

This one revolves around dealing with endlessly changing client requirements.  You always want to fulfill the client requirements but you also need to make sure that you are not losing money if they change their mind too often.  The old solution was based on trust and worked 90% of the time with no issues.  If the client had changes, they communicated them and agreed to any changes in price as a result.  The problems started when the changes impacted other requirements and no one had taken the time to thoroughly analyze the impact.  If it was identified early enough there was time to correct the problem.  However, if there were far reaching changes and impacts, the cost got quite high.  An organised system with dependencies and impacts measured was proposed.  In addition an audit trail was included so that any changes were tracked and could be reversed if necessary.  Quality processes were applied.  We are still working through the implementation.

Test Leader or Manager with concerns? Consider the Test Managers Conference.
NVP Quality Assurance Services
Contact us
Book a Meeting with NVP
LinkedIn Group
LinkedIn Company Page

Photo by Chandan Chaurasia on Unsplash

It has been an interesting start to the year. After a couple of weeks while people caught up on their email and considered how the year was starting, this week saw a rush of items starting up. There are too almost too many seminars to attend. The Quality Initiatives are also getting going and we want to discuss one of them.

We assessed an organization for its maturity level. Some parts were good and some needed work which is about what was expected. Covid-19 delayed some of the progress in addressing the issues simply because we could not get together to discuss the resolution to the issues. It is not bad to do it remotely but it is not as good; too many gaps.

However, the interesting part is that we have now reached the point where other groups (beyond QA) will be impacted. This means a whole sales and deployment process and pushing back against the resistance from people who see no benefit to them. Suffice to say, this will be interesting in the absence of personal contact and the ability to address the issues immediately.

If you have input, please contact us.

Test Leader or Manager with problems? Consider the Test Managers Conference.

Photo by Chandan Chaurasia on Unsplash

At this time of year we, like a lot of other people, look back at the past year and try to predict what might come in the next year. Obviously last year’s predictions were derailed by Covid-19.

Manual Testing

Manual testing continued in a lot of organisations with the emphasis on new or updated applications. Not as much was said about it, at least not that we saw, but there were still many people working in manual testing.

Automated Testing

There seems to be so many test tools right now, it is hard to keep track. Not sure if this was a personal experience with us paying more attention or whether there are simply a lot right now. There seems to be a test tool for everything and almost too many to choose from for any particular need.

Quality Assurance

There were some encouraging signs around Quality Assurance and Quality Management. One thing the Pandemic did, was give some time for consideration of the longer term and that always benefits Quality Assurance. Also, with Work from Home quite prevalent, there were less chances to correct any items that might go wrong. Getting it right the first time was critical.

If you have input on the above, you might want to consider our survey.

Photo by Markus Winkler on Unsplash