Skip to main content

Testing Mindset

Once upon a time there was a young and naive tester, he was new to the world of software testing. He often felt he didn't have what it took to be a tester. Sure, he found the odd bug, and he enjoyed his work, but he also often missed bugs, issues or problems.

After a while, he admitted to himself that this was a problem, and decided to seek help. He stood up from his desk and walked over to his test manager's desk. His manager was wise and experienced. He was the Mr Miyagi of testing, and as such was always offering zen-like advice for his team. A simple question about where the stapler had escaped to could turn into a somewhat baffling series of Haiku, leaving our young tester baffled.

Our novice explained his problem, and his concerns about how maybe he wasn't cut out for testing. The wise test manager smiled, thought for a moment and then opened his little Moleskine notebook. He turned carefully through the pages, settled on a page, looked up and said: "I overheard there was an issue with the login screens. A few users have reported issues, but not so many to suggest it was completely broken. Can you take a look?"

The tester was young and inexperienced, and this simple mis-direction worked well. Five minutes later he had isolated an issue with the login pages on the company's website. It fitted the bill, it only affected users in a minority web-browser, but would stop some users from logging in. He reported this issue to the programmers to be fixed.

The tester settled back into his routine, and got on with his normal testing work. But it wasn't long before his melancholy returned. He had a couple issues pass him by, despite being especially diligent in checking the conditions of satisfaction and even automating tests for several of them. He thought back to his last attempt at getting help from his test manager and realised he hadn't received an answer or ANY help for that matter.

He walked over to the test managers desk, and asked again for the test manager to help. The test manager looked somewhat puzzled, then lifted his notebook from his pocket, and leafed through the pages. Again he settled on a page, paused, and stated: "We got some feedback that the search function wasn't working. We don't have much to go on, but some users 'saw an error' whatever that might mean."

The tester, was somewhat annoyed at this second attempt at mis-direction and insisted on resolving the problem he asked about FIRST. This was after-all his career they were talking about! So the test manager suggested they talk about it after he'd investigated this latest issue, saying it probably wouldn't take long to sort out if there 'was a real bug' or not.

Within 20 minutes our tester had noticed that certain search terms caused an error in a popular web browser. While not an issue that would appear with every query, it was certainly one that would affect a large section of the users at some time. He quickly reported the issue to the programmers and marched back to the test managers desk.

Our tester started the conversation and explained that he didn't want to be chasing other peoples bugs. He wanted to find his own. Again the test manager smiled his zen-like smile, and picked his Moleskine™ notebook and handed it to the young tester. The young tester was about to lose his temper, when the still calm and collected manager suggested he flicked through the pages.

The now confused tester did just that, expecting to see notes from meetings and bug reports like those he had been given earlier. But instead he just saw one or two words on each page. The words didn't make a sentence or any other pattern - until the tester realised. They were just titles for sections of the website.

One page had "Login" written on it, another had "SECURITY" printed out in capital letters, and yet another page had "Search" scrawled across it. In fact many of the titles would apply to any or at least 'most' websites. The book was a checklist, the test manager wasn't giving him 'second hand' bug reports, he was enlightening him. All software has problems, ambiguities and bugs. So by suggesting a feature had a bug was just the test manager's way of getting his apprentice to approach the problem as a tester should. To approach with an investigative eye and with the expectation that he will learn more about how the software is and isn't working.


Popular posts from this blog

The gamification of Software Testing

A while back, I sat in on a planning meeting. Many planning meetings slide awkwardly into a sort of ad-hoc technical analysis discussion, and this was no exception. With a little prompting, the team started to draw up what they wanted to build on a whiteboard.

The picture spoke its thousand words, and I could feel that the team now understood what needed to be done. The right questions were being asked, and initial development guesstimates were approaching common sense levels.

The discussion came around to testing, skipping over how they might test the feature, the team focused immediately on how long testing would take.

When probed as to how the testing would be performed? How we might find out what the team did wrong? Confused faces stared back at me. During our ensuing chat, I realised that they had been using BDD scenarios [only] as a metric of what testing needs to be done and when they are ready to ship. (Now I knew why I was hired to help)

There is nothing wrong with checking t…

Manumation, the worst best practice.

There is a pattern I see with many clients, often enough that I sought out a word to describe it: Manumation, A sort of well-meaning automation that usually requires frequent, extensive and expensive intervention to keep it 'working'.

You have probably seen it, the build server that needs a prod and a restart 'when things get a bit busy'. Or a deployment tool that, 'gets confused' and a 'test suite' that just needs another run or three.

The cause can be any number of the usual suspects - a corporate standard tool warped 5 ways to make it fit what your team needs. A one-off script 'that manager' decided was an investment and needed to be re-used... A well-intended attempt to 'automate all the things' that achieved the opposite.

They result in a manually intensive - automated process, where your team is like a character in the movie Metropolis, fighting with levers all day, just to keep the lights on upstairs. Manual-automation, manumatio…

Scatter guns and muskets.

Many, Many years ago I worked at a startup called (a European online travel company, back when a travel company didn't have to be online). For a while, I worked in what would now be described as a 'DevOps' team. A group of technical people with both programming and operational skills.

I was in a hybrid development/operations role, where I spent my time investigating and remedying production issues using my development, investigative and still nascent testing skills. It was a hectic job working long hours away from home. Finding myself overloaded with work, I quickly learned to be a little ruthless with my time when trying to figure out what was broken and what needed to be fixed.
One skill I picked up, was being able to distinguish whether I was researching a bug or trying to find a new bug. When researching, I would be changing one thing or removing something (etc) and seeing if that made the issue better or worse. When looking for bugs, I'd be casting…