You’ve just joined a growing startup as their first tester. Coming from a large enterprise, you’re keen to implement proper quality metrics. After all, data-driven decisions were key to your previous success. Yet three months in, you’re drowning in spreadsheets and complex tools, with little to show for it. Sound familiar? The Enterprise Metrics Trap […]
The Solo Tester’s Dilemma: When Enterprise Metrics Don’t Fit Read More »
The pressure to deliver high-quality software quickly has never been greater. Quality Assurance teams often find themselves walking a tightrope between maintaining thorough testing practices and meeting aggressive delivery timelines. This is where DORA’s Lead Time for Changes (LTC) metric can be a valuable tool for QA teams looking to optimise their workflows without compromising
Optimising QA Workflows with DORA’s Lead Time for Changes Metric Read More »
Quality Engineering (QE) is shaping the future of testing by fundamentally changing how we approach product quality. Unlike traditional quality assurance (QA), which typically focuses on identifying defects late in the development cycle, QE shifts quality considerations left—embedding them at every stage, from design to production. Why Quality Engineering is the Future of Testing The
Is Quality Engineering the Future of Testing? Read More »
Learn how to test what matters most. Maintaining top-notch quality while keeping up with rapid development cycles can be challenging. We all know how crucial it is to implement efficient testing strategies that prioritise the most critical areas. That’s why I am excited to introduce my new eBook, “Risk Based Testing in Agile and DevOps
Risk-Based Testing in Agile and DevOps Teams Read More »
with Risk-Based Testing and the Eisenhower Matrix In software development, testing is often a balancing act. On one hand, we want to ensure comprehensive coverage to catch every possible bug. On the other hand, resources are limited, and time is always against us. This can lead to a challenge familiar to many testers: how do
Maximising Efficiency in Software Testing Read More »
Recently somebody mentioned to me that they don’t really like the test pyramid, and prefer the swiss cheese model. So I looked it up (again), and thought “yeah, that’s nice”. And you know how it sometimes goes, it kept niggling away at the back of my brain – now there’s a mental image you didn’t
The Swiss Cheese Model vs. Test Pyramid: A Complementary Approach Read More »
Fairly regularly, I see advice on LinkedIn and other platforms that one should “check one’s automated test scripts regularly” so they can be “kept up to date”. This advice always baffles me. How are these automated tests used if they need an intentional action to be checked for up-to-dateness? If you’re not using your automated
Don’t Let Your Automated Tests Gather Dust: Integrate Them Into Your Pipeline Read More »
The main question here is:
Is there a fundamental, qualitative difference between one method over the other that makes one objectively better than the other?
We fear what we don’t understand, and we don’t understand what we don’t know. Embracing Automation: Enhancing, Not Replacing, the Human Element in Testing The concept of automation often triggers a wave of concern and misunderstanding. There’s a common apprehension that automation equates to the redundancy of the human tester. However, this perception is far
Here be monsters – how fear fuels discussion about test automation. Read More »
In a recent poll on LinkedIn, a thought-provoking question was posed: What goes through your mind when you see an automated test dashboard showing all green? The responses, mainly falling into the ‘other’ category, revealed a telling sentiment: suspicion. Many believe that a fully green dashboard signals hidden defects lurking beneath the surface. This perspective,
If your application is bug free, do you need a tester? Read More »
