Technical versus non-technical testing skills—an interesting debate given the nature of software development. During this year’s Romanian testing conference, John Stevenson had the opportunity to sit in on and participate in an actual debate on this subject. This post summarizes his insightful observations.
It comes as no surprise that most people came forward to present the case that testers need to be technical. Stevenson felt compelled to write a post because he has an issue with labeling people as technical or non-technical as if one is better than the other. He and a few other attendees decided to come forward for the non-technical side. Read on to find out which side was voted the most persuasive.
Author Kenny Cruden begins this article by describing companies he’s come across, who have decided to develop software using agile methodologies, who view the QA role in teams as basically a waterfall tester who is involved with automated tests.
In his opinion, this description does a disservice to the breadth and depth of what he views the QA role to be. To cover the many different facets of the role and the value that each brings to the team and the product, Cruden put together a one-page picture that acts as a visual prompt.
It is included in his full write-up that also provides descriptions of the picture’s different sections. View it here.
How many times have you witnessed the following scenario? A new feature of the system you’re working on is developed, tested and put into production, only to crash weeks, days or even hours later in a way nobody anticipated. In most cases, someone actually thought about the problem that caused the crash, but the issue was not realized, communicated or accepted. It may have even been ignored.
In his article, Anders Dinsen references the 1986 Challenger explosion and digs a bit into the accident’s details. At one point, Dinsen mentions Richard Feynman, a member of the accident commission, who compared the decision making in the shuttle project to “a kind of Russian roulette.”
Dinsen draws parallels between the Challenger incident and software testing, while instructing readers on how constructively learn from failure. Take a look.
Though testers and QA play critical roles in software development life cycles, it is as every bit a responsibility for developers to create software that is reliable with minimal defects. Ultimately, a developer should have an understanding of basic testing processes in order to better deliver reliable software.
This post provides an overview of software testing and QA; it’s a perfect resource for both testers and developers alike. Read it here.