(Check out useful steps to take when tweaking test automation processes here!)\u00a0<\/a><\/h2>\nDeb continued: \u201cMost of the time teams try to write code for tests which are executable manually and call it test automation. What confuses this, even more, is the testing vs checking debate.<\/p>\n
\u201cBe it the approach of testing the software manually or with automated tests, one common skill the testers must possess is \u201cTest Craftsmanship\u201d. Test Craftsmanship is a combination of the right testing mindset, with the knowledge of various testing tools and techniques. For manual testing, a solid grounding in test craftsmanship i.e., right testing mindset and the knowledge of various test design techniques might just be enough as it is more procedural in nature.<\/p>\n
\u201cAutomation testing, on the other hand, requires knowledge of additional tool and languages for the tool to work. Depending on the context, both approaches serve different purposes and are equally important.\u201d<\/p>\n
DevOps & continuous delivery<\/h2>\n Since the last decade, the focus is moving really quickly to DevOps. This means continuous integration (CI) and continuous delivery (CD) is absolutely impossible without continuous testing (CT). Yet, the fastest (or only) way to achieve CT is through test automation.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn the fast-moving delivery and release life-cycles, manual testing does not provide much value. We need to focus on a healthy combination of exploratory testing and test automation (of all applicable types) to be effective as a team to build a good quality product. Any test that is important to be re-executed over a period of time needs to be automated at an appropriate level in test automation,\u201d added Bagmar.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile there is so much focus on test automation, one of the hindering factors for testers from taking up\u00a0test automation as a career option is the \u2018Fear of Code’\u201d.<\/p>\n
Since test automation involves writing code that involves accurate knowledge of one or more programming language(s), this scares a lot of engineers, according to Deb. There is a common misconception in the testing world that testers normally do not have access to the code and are more often than not involved in black box testing. So, there is no need to actually learn to programme.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat testers do not realise is the fact that the knowledge of code will help them, investigate defects, debug errors and expand their avenues more by helping them find the unknown. Testing IMO is more than just finding defects. It is about finding the unknown and helping make the software better,\u201d continued Deb.<\/p>\n
Technology involvement<\/h2>\n The most important skill required from the tester is the ability to get hands-on involved in technology. This involvement can be at various levels according to Bagmar:<\/p>\n
\nBe able to understand\/read code and make sense out of the same (logic)<\/li>\n Be able to understand\/read the existing automated tests to know what \u201cintents\u201d have been automated \u2013 this reduces waste by having to repeat the same intent-validations manually<\/li>\n Do effective gap-analysis based on what has already been automated, and what would add additional value if automated. Thus, the knowledge of what does not need to be automated, hence focus on more deeper learning,\u00a0understanding and exploration using human-mind<\/li>\n Contribute to enhancing automated test suite (unit\/integration, API, UI\/end-2-end \/performance\/security\/etc.)<\/li>\n Contribute to building a more testable and functional architecture.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nBagmar also noted that organisations are evolving as they see value from more deeper involvement from the testers in all phases of the software life-cycle. \u201cTesters need to evolve in this direction or else they will be in trouble\u201d.<\/p>\n
His blog on \u201cCareer Path of a Tester!<\/u><\/a>\u201d highlights more areas where a tester can contribute and grow in areas of building a good quality product\u00a0\u2013 check it out!<\/p>\n Written by Leah Alger<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
If you look around the testing landscape you will see that manual testing roles are disappearing, but not manual testing itself. So, do we still need the skill sets of a manual tester? Or is it all about automation testing? <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":13437,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"content-type":"","pmpro_default_level":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[145,67,60,439,1938,112,200,2970,564],"yoast_head":"\n
Testers knowledge towards automation skills<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n