Skip to main content

How to decide what and when to automate tests?



We all know that repetitive manual testing can be and is at times boring.... but unfortunately it's a necessity for some aspects of testing.

One thing that I love, and sure enough this reduces the load of manual testing, is automated testing, be it from the Service level, through an API and especially WebUI testing. Whenever any testing comes along, there is a question that is regularly asked by QA, do we want to automate this?

When deciding what tests we should automate I feel that it's important to answer some questions:
  • Will this test form a part of the regression pack for the application?
  • Will this test be run multiple times during the development process?
  • Can the same level of testing be achieved by automating this test?
I'll tackle the first question, as it's the most basic and the easiest to answer. If a test is to form a part of a regression pack, then yes it should be automated. The reason being that it will save time in the future, and will offer more assurance in releasing future software releases.

As for the second question, if a test is to be run multiple times then surely it makes sense to automate it and reduce the amount of effort it takes to run. This is especially interesting when it comes to a test to check if a bug has been fixed, in order to verify that subsequent builds do not reintroduce this bug into the wild, then by all means automate it, and run it as part of the build process (if at all possible) to try and catch these issues.

Finally, there are some aspects of manual testing that cannot be automated, for instance, checking the location of an element on a web page (for Web UI testing), whilst the naked eye can easily notice if an element is misplaced, or if something is appearing incorrectly (i.e. text overlapping other text). Because of this, I tend to shy away from automated testing for cross browser testing at the moment... However...

Google have an interesting piece of software that monitors the top 1000 pages in search results when testing new versions of chrome, they will detect if there are any variations between the version under test or previous versions, and email developers to let them know. It is even so clever to include knowledge of where there may be dynamic content, like on bbc.co.uk for instance where news articles are ever changing and dynamically creating the front page. Whilst I understand that something like that is extremely complex and possibly overkill for some applications, it is an extremely impressive piece of software that I would love to one day see in action!

So whilst automation is an extremely effective toolset to have, there will always have to be some element of manual testing to go along with the automation. Now this manual testing, doesn't have to be scripted, far from it, it can be in the form of Exploratory Testing (more about in future posts). As time goes forward, I am sure there will be more effective ways of performing cross browser testing and ensuring elements are displayed on the front end.  This doesn't hinder the effectiveness of automating tests at a service level or even an API level, as the response and requests for these are structured in a way that isn't going to change over time, and so I find that you can achieve 100% coverage on Service and API level tests in an automation test suite.

There is also the benefit of the time saved by automating a test can be spent tackling more important and complex test cases during the development of an application. So not only does it help with reducing testing effort on regression, it increases the effectiveness of the testing effort going forward. 

It also lends itself to application ownership, which is often only seen during the development of the application, but in reality should be whilst the application is being used, as these tests will live for the lifecycle of the product.

For this post we have only really talked about Acceptance Tests, in future we will discuss the importance of Unit Tests and Integration Tests.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Testers: Be more like a Super-Villain!

Who doesn't love a Super Hero? Talk to my son, and he'll tell you how much he loves them, talk to many adults and they'll say the same! Deep down, we all love to be the Super Hero, we all want to save the day! However, I want to talk about the flip side of Super Heroes, the Super Villains... I often play Imaginext with my son, and I (unfortunately?) am nearly always the Super Villain! Be it Lex Luthor, Joker, Two Face, Mr Freeze or The Riddler! These are all great characters and great Super Villains, but why would I want to write about Super Villains? A while ago where I worked, we had a few Super Heroes, people who would be able to come in and "fix" things that had broken and help deliver projects on time. We then shifted, we decided to do away with the Super Hero culture and try and prevent from being in that position in the first place, whilst we didn't go as far as wanting to hire Super Villains, it's definitely a story that has stuck with me and t...

Value in QA Courses/Qualifications?

I have in the past questioned the value in getting certifications/going on courses for the sake of getting a certificate in testing. Whilst I do still question the worth of such an issue, I have recently read some articles which has shown me there is more value in these courses/certificates than I previously gave them credit for. The main positive that I can think of, upon completing a course like an ISEB Foundation, is that it ensures that testers are on the same page when it comes to communicating. A bug is a bug, or if I'm speaking to someone about Integration testing, they know exactly what I am talking about and won't get confused. I think in ensuring that everybody is on the same page when it comes to discussing testing issues/testing activities, it helps in gaining respect and confidence from other teams and other team members, as we are all singing from the same hymn sheet.  It isn't just about communication in the term of words however, it is impor...

Famous Movie Quotes applied to Software Engineering - Cool Hand Luke

I thought it might be a bit fun to do a series of blog posts where we take a famous movie quote, and apply it somehow to QA/Testing or even the software engineering life-cycle. This is one famous movie quote, and I think it applies greatly to Engineering in general (or anywhere in fact)! I don't think a week has gone by in my career where I couldn't have uttered the following: What we have here is a failure to communicate (Cool Hand Luke) I saw this quote (although I haven't seen the film), and I don't even think it needs any explanation.... But I'll explain anyways! I would say that 80% of problems that are in a workplace are down to a failure in communication, if a bug is found, a failure to communicate the effects of the bug properly can lead to a false severity, or a false priority. That's not the only time when a failure to communicate can be damaging, especially for QA, but a failure to communicate when understanding requirements or when explain...