Tester 2.0 - Definition of an Agile Tester

I have been to a number of SIGiST Conferences over the last year and have always been impressed by the calibre of the speakers there. There has been a theme lately talking about Agile Development and Agile Testing but the thing that always seems to missing is someone giving their interpretation on Agile Testing. To actually describe what an Agile Tester is! And what they should be doing.

Below I am going give my opinion of what an Agile Tester by describing skill set needed.We are after all only as good as our skill set! I am going to rate them from 1 to 10 with 10 being needed and 1 being desirable.

Skill	Score	Reason
Creativity	10	A good tester needs to be extremely creative when trying to test applications. Developers like to think that they are clever and get all the bugs before its released. Unfortunately this is not true when a tester starts being creative in the way they test the application and breaks it very quickly!
Innovation	10	A good tester needs to be able to innovative with the tools that they have. An example would be in SaaS(Software as a Service) companies who constantly striving to be the next big thing and competing against the likes of Google, Microsoft, Salesforce, etc. This drives innovation in development which means that it drives innovation in testing!
Test Automation	9	Every Agile tester needs to be able to do some form of automated testing. I am not saying that the tester must know how to use every tool that is out there but they need to understand how to create the automated tests.
Exploratory Testing	7	Agile Testing tends to mean Exploratory testing. I know that some people will disagree with this but because testing tends to happen on the fly and appears ad hoc but it isn't. Exploratory testing does have a set of rules that need to be adhered and will mostly bring a number of bugs to the surface just as well as normal scripted testing.
Communication	7	One of the main pillars of Agile Development is communication. This is very important in my opinion because a good tester must be able to communicate bugs to developers and requirements to end users. A good tester will also be able to challenge technical architects on their ideas. I know the last sentence can be very hard to achieve in large organisations but it doesn't mean that you can't send them an email to make suggestions.
Development	5	An Agile Tester should not be afraid to look at a developers code and if need be, hopefully in extreme cases, go in and correct it. I am not suggesting for one minute that they must be able to code entire applications but must have the confidence to look at a bug, spot the error in the code and either write a unit test to break it or point out the line where they think the issue is. An example of this is where doing Paired Programming with one developer we shaved of nearly 70% off the time it took to run a unit test test suite just by doing a one line change to their tests which got them to make one other small change.
Ability to work in pairs	3	I am a fan of being able to knock ideas off each other. I wouldn't do paired programming all the time but I like the concept and how it seems to get things done properly with little fuss.

This is not a comprehensive list but these for me are the most important things. Tester 2.0 is something that a number of testers need to strive for if they do not want to get left behind. There is a definite blurring of lines between development and testing. Gone are the days of "I have finished my part, over the wall it goes!". There is also a move to more "Grey Box" testing because of this blurring.

Interpretations of the V-model

I have recently been doing interviews and one question that I like to ask interviewees is "Where do you feel testers should sit within the V-Model?"

The V-Model (as pictured below) is a representation of how most "development" tasks have an equal "testing" task. I like to think of it as testings equivalent to Newton 3rd law.

This should be a good thing because it shows that there are different aspects of testing that need to be done during the software development lifecycle.

All the interviewee's seemed to give a different answer to the question above. Being the interviewer I was hoping for one of 2 answers.

The first answer would be one that made me rethink my thoughts on the V-Model. To be honest as an interviewer I am always looking forward to someone making me rethink a topic.

The other answer is that testing should encompass the entire V-Model. From the beginning of the Business Requirements stage to the end of the Acceptance Testing stage. The reason why I think this is because Quality Assurance should be in every aspect of the software development lifecycle.

I know that this is something from the Waterfall methodology but its a good way to see what needs to be done in the lifecycle and can easily be transformed into an Agile development.

ISEB/ISTQB - Is it really worth it?

I have been reading James Bach's blog for a while and in the latest post he has commented on Alan Richardson's commentary on ISEB/ISTQB.

Finally I have someone that agrees with me that ISEB/ISTQB while being good in theory is pretty useless in real life. I know that most people reading this will be saying "That is a very bold statement!". I know that it is and below I will explain why I agree with Alan.

Background
Testers have been fighting for years to remove the stigma that testing software is easy and that any person can do it. This, I feel, is because software testers used to be glorified data inputters with a little technical background. No wonder developers saw a secondment to testing as a demotion. Then Kent Beck came along and wrote Test-Driven Development: By Example. A developer who came along and made testing fun for developers! Something that testers could never get right! So lets have a look at the pros and cons of having a ISEB/ISTQB certificate.

Pros

• Lets start why I think ISEB/ISTQB is good. I just said that testers have been fighting for years to remove a stigma that testing software is easy. ISEB came along and people who didn't work in the industry suddenly thought that testing was a little harder because you needed a certificate.
• It also sets out standard names for things so that if one tester speaks to another they are speaking in the same tongue. Its also the latest buzzword so HR people will more than likely to give you an interview when you apply for a job.

Cons

• The ISEB/ISTQB foundation course teaches the exact same things that I was taught during my first year of university. So not only do you have to pay your way through university but then have to pay from £140 to £700 to get the certificate.
• I met a ISTQB examiner in my last job and he did not seem to understand testing in the real world. So are the testers that are getting these certificates also getting a working understanding of testing? I honestly don't think so!
• The other thing, and this is a big thing for me, is that the foundation course book mentions Agile Development 3 times. Those three entries are no more than a quick mention. Is it worth getting a certificate that doesn't give a chapter what is becoming the most common development methodology.

Results
ISEB/ISTQB is unfortunately going the way of the the MSCE certificate of the late 90s. Its becoming no more than a buzz word and I feel is lowering the standard of testing. I know that I am not the only person who thinks this. I read a blog entry not so long ago where testers in India are seen as the poor cousins. Something that we've been working against!

This has to stop and we as testers are the ones who can stop this! Come on testers, lets start a revolt and get certificates to mean something!

Selenium Grid - Why is this the way of the future?

Update: If you are looking for a Selenium Grid Tutorial I have put it here

I have been working with Selenium Grid since Philippe Hanrigou and others at ThoughtWorks released it at the end of last year. I knew then that it was going to become the standard way for automated GUI web application testing.

As an application it has great potential since it is has all the best bits of Selenium but it does multiple browsers in parallel. Suddenly your testing that used to take n units of time to run are taking 1/n to run. As a practitioner you can get things done quicker, as a manager you can get things done for cheaper! Everyone is a winner.

The other thing that makes the grid work well, and this is a thing that makes Selenium Remote Control work brilliantly, is the ability to use any language to control the test. People use Java, Ruby, .Net, Python and many more to create their test scripts and run it with the appropriate client. If you have the appropriate client application like TestNG for Java or DeepTest for Ruby or PNUnit for .Net you can start running tests with one script in parallel. The one limitation toof using these test tools is that you only really have one browser application, like Firefox, being tested at a time. This is because you only have one instance of the Selenium object in your code.

The way that I have got around this is to have many instances of the Selenium object in my code that each control a certain type. This type could be Internet Explorer 7 on Vista or Firefox 2 on XP.

An example of this would be (Note: I use c# to create my tests and then run them with NUnit)

[Setup]
public void setup(){
//Vista IE7 Instance
VistaIE7selenium = new DefaultSelenium("hub", 4444, "IE7 on Vista", "http://testserver");

//XP Firefox2 Instance
XPFirefox2selenium = new DefaultSelenium("hub",4444 , "Firefox2 on XP", "http://testserver");
XPFirefox2selenium.Start();
}


[Test]
public void GridTest(){
VistaIE7selenium.Open("/index.html");
XPFirefox2selenium.Open("/index.html");
}

As you can see it has the ability to create multiple instances of Selenium and then run them. This then leaves the handling of the Selenium Remote Control up to the Grid. As Philippe says, "It allows you to gridify your tests".

The negatives of Selenium Grid is that its still a work in progress. I know, thats hardly a reason to call it a negative. There are also a number of bugs but its growing section of OpenQA.org so give it a chance! I have 7 Selenium Remote Control instances running against my Grid (all virtualised with MS Virtual Server and WMWare) and I haven't had many issues. I have hooked Selenium Grid into our CruiseControl.NET server to test all the different browsers. I still have a lot of work to do with this but I know that it will be worth it in the end!

If you want to automate web testing and you want to do it efficiently use Selenium Grid! It will make your life a lot easier!

What makes a good automated test?

I have been asked to try automate the testing of a wider range of for the group. This is going to be quite challenging since I have not automated desktop applications for about 15 months and the software we make is quite unique. I will also hopefully be teaching the other testers how to maintain the automated tests and eventually create their own.

This challenge has made me think back on my automated testing experience and ask "What makes a good automated test?". A good automated test has all the hallmarks of a good manual test except that its comparatively quick and cheap to run. This means that an automated test is successful when it finds bugs and repeatable where ever the software is installed.

In terms of web testing it would be a test script that can be created and then stored in a central place and be run from the central place. Ideally this would be also run on the continuous integration server when doing builds.

The thing that makes a good automated test great is scalability. I recently watched a YouTube video of the Selenium Users Meet-up. There were Google staff there saying that their testing farm handles 51000 tests and most Friday's all of these tests run. They then went on to complain that Selenium struggled to scale to that size. To be honest at that size I am not surprised!




P.S. To those who are waiting for the next Selenium Tutorial I am hoping to have it complete in the next week for everyone to use.

What would people like for the next Selenium Tutorial?

Thanks to everyone who has been using my site and all those who are subscribed to my RSS Feed. I haven't released another tutorial for couple of weeks and have started thinking of what would people like next for a Selenium tutorial.

I am struggling to think what people would really like. I would appreciate it if people would take the time to let me know, via the comments section of this blog, what tutorial they would like next. Please don't think that your questions are too novice. I would like to help as many people out as possible!

I look forward to your replies!

Is documenting test processes a bad idea in an Agile Development Environment?

I work in a smallish development team in Southampton as some of you know. There are other development teams in the group in United Kingdom and in France that all fall under the same group of companies of different sizes.

The unfortunate problem that we have is that there isn't a properly documented process for getting everything in place and ready for each testing cycle. Once we have everything ready we have another problem that I will hopefully discuss in a future posting.

This is where I had the thought "Is documenting test processes a bad idea in an Agile Development Environment?". If you have worked in an office with ISO9001 accreditation you will know that everything needs to be documented or if you have worked in a Six Sigma office you will have noticed that you have to put everything you do in a database so the "Black Belts" or "Master Black Belts" can see areas that need improvement.

So back to my question, "Is documenting test processes a bad idea in an Agile Development Environment?". My answer is definitely! And I am going to admit this is a fairly biased answer having started my career in large financial institutions where I was taught that everyone is expendable but their process knowledge isn't. This means that everything needs to be documented. However my thoughts on this is that things need to documented and followed to a point as long as that point does not impact on the creativity of the software developers and the testers.

Its this creativity that allows people to come up with new and exciting ways of developing and testing. Tools like the xUnit and Selenium and many more have come from this creativity. This then needs to be balanced with some form of Total Quality Management (TQM) so that everything can be reproduced if and when needed.

Documented processes can't be completely wrong, if they were then large companies like IBM, Citrix and Microsoft would have never got to where they are now!