So…what tester are you? Going Global

The So…what tester are you? has been a huge success and I really do thank each and every one of you who has read them, commented on them and spread the word. And a big thanks to all involved who spent a very long time bringing all of it together.

In collaboration with the Software Testing Club we've now put together an eBook of the testers which will be free to download and distribute.

The book is about ready to go but we still have a few sponsorship slots available.

So if you want to sponsor the book then please email me at editor@thesocialtester.co.uk for more information.

Rob..

Is software testing really a service?

I’ve always subscribed to the concept that the testing we offer is essentially a service to the business. The business engage with the test team for our services. I hear this phrase mentioned a lot mainly around how we can improve our service, or how best to manage this service and how we can maintain our independent service. We, the test team, maintain our impartiality and cast our critical eye on the software. We are a service. Or so I thought.

It sounds good in theory and I’ve previously worked in a service environment first hand. But I’ve come to realise recently that the service mentality is not helpful. It creates a mental divide that often creates a very real divide between the rest of the team and the testers. It re-enforces the dreaded wall concept and it somehow marks testing out as being special, different, aloof. And the divide, in my opinion, is not a healthy way of looking at testing.

I feel we need to take a step back and look at the picture from a higher level. If we do this, we see the whole development team, including testing, as the service? As the service to our business?  To our customers?

As development teams consist of programmers and testers (and other roles such as PM etc) the notion of the test team being a separate service seems fundamentally flawed. At a basic level each and everyone one of us are in some form of service agreement with other people. Our friends, family and colleagues for example. And there is no refuting that at all. That is everyday human transactions. But I genuinely believe that describing “testing” as a service is misleading people and creating a barrier that isn’t positive.

No matter what methodology is being used, it makes more sense to think of the project team as a whole? As a whole unit delivering value? As a group of people brought together for their skills and ability to deliver good software?

Are we really bringing together each service (BA, PM, programming, testing, support, documentation etc) to create bespoke project teams made up of individual service agreements? Maybe this is why some teams get so hung up with documentation, sign offs, gates and criteria. And yet in all my time working I’ve never heard any other department refer to themselves as a service. (no doubt some people have..let me know). So why must testing?

I can see why I used to believe software testing was a service. It’s because testing was hung on the back of the project, something that happened during a certain time period, something that required a special build to be handed over and then thrown back, something that was troublesome, independent and impartial, something that happened as a phase and not as a principle. And it makes sense in that environment. But is is helpful?

As more testers are being involved at the start of the project, maybe the service concept will give way to the team concept. Maybe people are realising that the testers are no more important than the programmers. Or that the support team have just as equal input to the project as testing or project management.

I’ve seen the dangers that testing as a service can bring; the late delivery to test, the lack of test input throughout the project, the poor quality release, the throwing over the wall, the communicating through the medium of defects, the blame culture, the metric wars and the late deadlines and poor quality releases.

I’ve seen the masses of documentation, the quality police mentality, the gated entry and exit barriers and the general lack of communication between departments. I’ve seen months wasted on up front design only to find the pesky testers destroy it through late in the process static analysis. But most importantly I’ve seen the thousands of forum threads from irate testers berating the project team for all of the above. I’ve met them. I was once one of them.

And before my critics complain I’m about to go on extolling the virtues of agile methodologies, this has nothing to do with agile, wagile, waterfall, fragile, lean, mean, bream or any other methodology we can name. But it has everything to do with people. More importantly, how these people integrate in to a team. Sometimes the blame lies with management for building silos, sometimes with testers for enforcing them and sometimes for all of the team simply conforming to testing norms.

But anything we can do, as testers, to break down the barriers between groups within the team should be done. Right? We want to be involved, we want to be asked for our opinion, we want to be delivering good software, we want to be part of a great team, we want to be respected and trusted. Can we truly achieve these things by being a service to the rest of the team? By marking ourselves out as special, different, distant, contracted in?

I’m not saying we should conform, be walked over, pushed aside and devalued. We can still be impartial, critical, questioning, creative and communicative. These very traits are why we’ve been selected to be part of the team aren’t they?

And yes, agile does try to re-enforce this team mentality where quality is shared, testing is done first and team collaboration is key, but it doesn’t mean to say this is not possible in other methodologies. I’ve seen waterfall teams pull together, utilise testers right at the start, build a team including testers and ensure communication and team moral stay high. And they have succeeded.

But if we look at the testers from afar we can begin to see how we are just part of the team. Nothing more. Nothing less. We posses a skill that the team needs. A skill that compliments the rest of the team. A skill that is testing.

The customer and business want a service that delivers great software; and that service is the team, of which testing is just one part.

I know some people like the wall. They like bragging about finding 100’s of defects in the first week. They like seeing the rest of the project team squirming around trying to explain why it’s all gone pair shaped with 3 weeks to release. I’ve worked with these people. They live and breathe negativity. They strive in a blame culture. That’s what gets them out of bed in a morning.

But for me, it simply doesn’t cut it. The failure of a project is a reflection on the team behind it. And that absolutely includes the testers.

A team is a team. And on the face of it, it needn’t be more complicated than that.

This is why I see the testing as a service to be flawed. It assumes we are outsiders and separate and that just feels wrong. We do have specialist skills and thinking, but we are not outsiders, impartial or distant. We are part of the team.

And if we must keep using the term service to describe our role in the team, then we need to fully understand that many of the problems we spend hours griping about come directly from this view of ourselves….

Disagree? Agree? Not bothered either way? Let me know why in the comments. I’m open to fine tuning this view, building on it. Let me know.

Rob..

Berlin. Agile Testing Days. Last day

We are mid way through the final day of Agile Testing Days. I’ve done my presentation now. Phew. First one done.

 

Last night was a really good evening ‘chill out’ dinner with lots of beer and dancing. See the pictures for more.

 

The closing talk last night was by Tom Gilb. At first I didn’t understand it and it sounded very unagile. But I got the point. Do less up front design and make sure your requirements are requirements and not design. With some simple rules I feel a little more empowered to apply some of this thinking.

 

Mary P did a good key note this morning talking about defect injection mainly.

 

It was really good to meet so many new people last night at the dinner. The community here is incredibly diverse but that adds to the atmosphere and makes it a really interesting and fun place to be. The conference has been really well organised and the entertainment and hospitality is fantastic. Thanks to Jose and his team for that