Are we hesitant to discuss non-automated test cases in software testing?

Discussions
1

Does there seem to be a hesitation in discussing non-automated test cases in the current landscape of software testing. With the rapid rise of automation, continuous integration (CI), and continuous delivery (CD), and even….AI…what’s your experience?

  • No - we discuss use regularly
  • Sometimes, i’m under tool focus pressure
  • Yes, automation is priority
  • Not sure, not mentioned much at work
0 voters

Bonus cake for thoughts and comments :cake:

1 Like
2

I think that it’s more powerful to see automation as just another part of manual. Or, even better, everything as testing and tools as our choice.

7 Likes
3

I don’t talk a lot in terms of either “test cases” or “manual vs automated”, but I do spend plenty of time talking about the value of testing and skills other than programming that are worth cultivating to do it well.

5 Likes
4

From time to time I have some product/department managers asking me about my testing & test cases. I usually tend to go in my mind with a preconceived notion of scripted/detailed/explicitly written and organized test cases that ‘anyone’ could do.
I noticed that I have a high chance of doing the wrong thing if I don’t ask specifically many questions about what they want to obtain, for what reason, how is useful to them, in what format, where to store artifacts, and what reporting they want.
Some examples of scenarios that appeared to me:

  • test cases as a release package checklist;
  • test cases as a structured coverage method for the system’s new feature through testing;
  • test cases as a way to explain the differences between some oracle and the information that we found in the product;
  • test cases as a set of scenarios that could be automated;
  • test cases as a set of use cases that the business can review or go through to accept a product;
  • test cases as a set of feature/task agile bs acceptance criteria checks;
  • test cases as a way to have someone else do the testing; or to teach/onboard a new tester;
  • test cases as a way to report on testing progress or results;
  • test cases as a way to have a specifications list

Non-testers use very often this term. I’d expect testers to translate that and be professional about their work, looking beyond and trying to avoid using it, or just being specific about what it means or how a goal could be achieved, for the sake of remaining professionals.

3 Likes
5

From my experience, a hybrid approach that integrates both automated and manual testing is crucial for comprehensive quality assurance. While automation testing streamlines processes, manual testing ensures that complex, user-centric scenarios receive the attention they deserve, maintaining software quality and user satisfaction.

6

I don’t think we are scared to talk about it generally, but there are some community anti patterns that might give people pause for thought.

  • Blogs, events, talks all focusing on the new shiny things and forgetting to cover the still used basics. This makes it seem like all the industry does is CI/CD and AI and everyone is using them (or if you’re not you’re behind the times).
  • Different bubbles of testers talk about different things, there’s a lot of testers all over LinkedIn talking about test cases and manual testing. You just have to know where to look (and follow them). We might fall into just following / engaging with the media of new flashy tooling rather than the basics.
  • Some corners of the community will (unfortunately) police the use of terms like manual testing & test cases and jump down your throat if you don’t use these terms their way. This can mean some people just avoid the subject rather than be pulled into those arguments.
  • Finally, manual testing & test cases are viewed as dirty words by some people. We might not want to talk about legitimate forms of testing for fear of being mocked by our peers, cast aside by the industry or thought as ludites!
1 Like
7

Testing needs to be subjective.

1 Like
8

In our projects we talk manual testing all the time; we don’t have automation, all of our testing is manual….

2 Likes
9

Guess manual tests are all over the place everywhere. Where I have been 30ys there have been lots of them, even in organisations with high ambitions for automation (automation was even bigger in the pre-graphical frontend days)

1 Like