Scripting vs. Exploratory testing - where does your testing style land? Spontaneity vs. Structure?
Creativity vs. Consistency?
Where do you sit?
#spicyQuestion #interpretAsYouWill…
2 Likes
I usually have my test cases written in a way to cover all the acceptance criteria, along with the obvious negative cases, and some other variety - basically a checkbox exercise to make sure the Devs haven’t missed any specific requirements or spelled fields wrong, that kind of thing.
Then I’ll move on to properly trying to find the holes, which is more of a “I wonder what happens when I do… {x}?” exercise. Sometimes I do this during the checkbox phases as well, since I screen record my testing sessions and I’m usually happy to check anything that occurs to me in the moment, so I don’t forget it later.
Consistency and structure is still something I could probably use more of though, when I look back on older tests I’ve written. Maybe not so much in specific test steps, but in heuristics and having more of a plan. “I wonder what happens” leads to finding plenty of defects, but I still think there’s room to tighten up my approach.
If I script at all its straight into automation usually smoke, health or regression coverage level, usually structured by known user flows and reasonable coding practices. Known risk focus
Testing is also structured to some extent, I have my patterns, my experience tends to mean a lot of that structure is natural. Collect risk ideas, research and note down test ideas alongside a level of testing sessions so a level of focus in what I’m looking for, what tools to assist in that investigation etc. I also work off high level quality plans and sessions will have goals which may or may not be in test write ups.
Consistently creative in my structure, often with a level of spontaneity and deliberate high levels of variation, my brain often works faster than my hands so no getting away from having ideas and sometimes going down those rabbit holes real time on occasion.
Testing is also designed with discovery in mind with a bias towards currently unknowns, that though is now likely subconscious these days but always there.
It’s not adhoc though, that’s more for the pub over a beer having a quick look at a mates app.
1 Like
Is there an assumption here that Exploratory testing isn’t structured or consistent? Perhaps it’s how I’ve read it.
I’ve worked at a number of organisations that need structured testing (for auditability and control) and have implemented a structured approach to exploration. Exploration doesn’t mean unplanned, undocumented and unrepeatable in all cases… if you take proper notes and look at risks to drive out test charters then you can explore with purpose.