Replacing QA Column in the Work Board

It was quite a journey. I started as a completely manual tester who could occasionally do exploratory testing. Then, I made a drastic change of transforming my work ethics, learning automation, using monitoring tools and moving my role towards the more generic QA role where testing in production is a part of the quality assessment. And now, with yet again a bigger change in my quality professional’s journey… I promote replacing QA column after development with something like “Desk Check”. 

I recently joined a new project engagement where we can build the product from scratch. This means that we also are creating our work culture from the bottom up. It looks like our favorite phrase nowadays is “adaptable to change”. With all this, we are trying to identify the first version of our work board.

When one of our team members automatically added a column called “QA” after development, I suggested to rename it to “Desk Check”. You may wonder why would I do that when I am still a part of the team with a role of QA?

Quality should be in-built, not tested in

Thinking of quality should start as early as the user story or feature is being created. How will we gain confidence that development was successful? What metrics will we use to measure implementation? Can we recover from the worst case scenarios easily? Questioning is a huge part of quality promoting. This should be done throughout the development process before even the desk check.

Desk check is not assigned to any role specifically

If development was successful can be evaluated not only by testers but also product owners or even other developers. Desk check is more of a concept where developers show their work (and their implemented checks), get asked questions, and sometimes pair test. It can be very useful to get a product owner to give feedback on the feature before it is marked as done.

Quality of the product is a shared responsibility

When I suggested using “Desk Check” instead of “QA”, one of the developers smiled and said “Oh, so you’re not a control freak gatekeeper. We all have to be responsible.”. This is exactly what I aim to promote. However, what matters here a lot is also the fact that your team is engaged in this.

Having the attitude that all the team is responsible for quality is quite a task and I won’t say you can do it on your own and change people overnight. You can’t. They have to be willing to work in these ways and it can be very challenging. Being responsible for quality as a developer has certain benefits: you gain confidence about your work’s reliability, learn to question your own work, get to collaborate and understand better other team members like product team, and, actually help with your developer skills to improve the automated checks. The drawback of this is: you need to put effort. Way more effort than if QA is responsible for quality.

In summary, it is a challenging change to actually shift left and not only talk about it. You may find yourself wondering what QA role does if the quality is inbuilt and developers write their own checks… And that’s normal. I did, too. What is important to understand is that teams still need Quality Evangelists to question, promote quality, investigate CI/CD clutter, analyze requirements, tackle misunderstandings and share their testing knowledge with others. 

Advertisements

5 Tips on How to Make Yourself Respected as a Tester in a Company

A lot of times testers feel like they are not valued enough or that their efforts are not visible. Good quality usually is an expected outcome so it is hard to show that the role of a tester is actually very helpful and added up to quality improvements.

Possibly the most challenging work environment I had as a tester was becoming the first full time tester in a startup. There was no testing awareness prior to my role. It took time and effort to prove my value, but in the end, when I was changing jobs, some people openly admitted that they felt that I was one of the most valuable people within the company. So, what tips would I have to reach this state and become actually respected and very valued working as a tester?

  1. Open up to learnings and collaborations

    Take every chance to collaborate with other team members. It does not matter what their role is – it is extremely beneficial to collaborate and learn from others. Be it a developer, sales person or manager. Be proactive in this – tell colleagues that you’d love to learn more and maybe just shadow then for a while. It can add up a lot to your domain knowledge as well as interpersonal relationships with team members. Sometimes a programmer may even think of you when they are working on a new feature and ask you for your input for unit tests, for example.

  2. Be transparent about what you work on and ask for feedback

    If you have daily standups, then during them share the summary of your findings: it has to be concrete and informative. Try to be specific and mention what areas were tested, what was overall quality, if there was a big issue found – feel free to share it. If your organisation does not have standups, try to communicate this information in other channels – be it weekly discussion, plannings or just certain quality reports. Why not to make a quality newsletter? Keep people updated. Also, if you need any help or think that testability was causing some issues – let the team know. Sometimes all the team needs is to know about the pain points in order to help you solve them. Another tip is to arrange regular learning sharing meetings or show-and-tell sessions on what you created – maybe you learned some tricks in test automation or found an interesting bug which had to have a lot of investigation. Let the team know.

  3. Promote pair testing

    Do some sessions with developers, managers, product team members or even sales people. It will help them to see your role differently as well as possibly uncover unexpected bugs. Every person has a different set of experience and their usage of the product may be different. A lot of times developers may even sense what parts of the product are buggy, while product or sales people know what is actually important and where to put extra attention when testing.

  4. Use analytics to prioritize and drive your testing

    Testing in production is more and more of a thing. It is very important for us as testers to get to know our users. A lot of times we cannot really cover all the test scenarios either, especially in the times of big data and microservices. If possible, get to know the monitoring systems – what is being monitored in production? Can you see what features are mainly used by users? What browsers are your users using? All this data can help you to identify what actually matters. You can then prioritize your testing based on learnings and even include impact numbers to JIRA tickets. For example, you could quantify how important the issue is on IE8 by looking at the analytics numbers for users. Same could be done for functionality related problems. If issue you reported is on IE11 and most of users are using it – it adds extra weight. In the long run, business teams will really respect your input as you will be able to provide quality insights based on actual KPIs (if they are related to user experiences). Ability to do testing driven by user data can help you to provide very well respect insights on quality which could be useful even to the CEO.

  5. Involve yourself in support and customer feedback analysis

    If there is feedback functionality or support team for your product, try to get involved there. This will help you to get to know the user and their pain points. Analysing the issues you will learn more about the product and also get asked to join further investigations. This way you will be learning a lot of valuable information about the actual users which will be really appreciated by anyone in the team.

These 5 points really help raise testing awareness and help transmit the value of testing to the company. In the end, we all are working for the same goal of having a high quality product and as testers we promote this mindset.

How Does the Product Make You Feel: Usability, Testing & Airports

Recently I have been thinking about the future of testing. More and more I think that the future of a tester’s profession won’t be about the technology choices or even automation, but rather adding a human quality to the products. We will be the ones to stay alert on ethical sides of products, question design, development and usability (ease of use of a product or service).

As a quite experienced question asker, I get to wear multiple hats and collaborate with various departments during the product development. From my experience, I would say as a QA, you get to work with (not limited to only these people of course):

  • R&D questioning algorithms and their output
  • UX designers questioning design choices and trying to wear user’s shoes
  • Business and product teams questioning requirements and acceptance
  • Development teams questioning implementation
  • Management questioning priorities
  • Sales teams questioning domain

All this questioning for me means representing the user. Making sure the quality of the product is satisfactory and user feels good using it. Usability when it comes to feelings is one of the top qualities.

I am not sure if it’s because of my recent thoughts on people vs. products, but I became very sharp on observing the world and, oh boy, how much it hurts when our lives are affected by poor usability and bad design.

Usability and Bad Design Adventures

I was flying into Munich airport recently and remembered one of the most interesting talks I’ve heard on EuroSTAR 2017 “The Sky Is The Limit! – Or How To Test A New Airport Terminal”. In this talk, Christian Brødsjø shared the experiences of testing Oslo Airport. And, of course, it involved people – they had to see the readiness of the airport, the ease to use and the operational abilities. Airport testing is not an easy task, it requires a lot of time and simulation of the actual airport activities in order to see what feedback people are giving and how it would actually work. Nobody wants to repeat the story of the disastrous opening day for Heathrow’s Terminal 5.

When I was searching for more information on the airports, I found many articles on failed airports and even airport representatives admitting that their airports are a mess. This makes me think that I am not alone having bad feelings about airports. Sometimes I need a reminder that bad user experience is something that we should talk about.

In the past month, I had a pleasure of getting to work in the same team with a very caring UX designer Shawn Lukas. We discussed many times how important it is to care about the actual users. A lot of times we don’t even know people for whom we are creating the product – we have to make sure to get to know them instead of guessing or assuming how they are as we are creating something for them. In addition, as users very often we tend to blame ourselves for the product issues. A lot of times we take products the way they are and deal with their imperfections: it may hurt to use them, we may get annoyed, but we stay silent and just try to find workarounds. It should not be this way, the way we feel about products matters and we should speak up.

So, coming back to the Munich airport… It is one of the busiest airports in the world and I am sure that a lot of people worked on making it a good experience and did as much as they could. However, I travel a lot and usually don’t expect much from airports, but certain design decisions left me a little bit annoyed, frustrated and even angry at some points. I am sure that my mum would get lost in that airport – that is not a good sign, because everyone should be able to use the airport. Especially that traveling already is a pretty stressful thing in itself.

How Munich airport managed to trigger my feelings?

Sunday. After waiting at the airport and traveling, I just wanted to get some rest and get out of the destination airport. After landing, I went to go get my luggage. It is a big airport, so gets rather tricky with turns and quite a bit of walking – that’s alright. However, the way to the exit had these things bothering me:

  • Confusing direction arrow signs. Unfortunately I did not take a photo, but imagine this – there is a space with many escalators, some going up (on the left), some down (straight). There is a sign that baggage claim is ⬆. Does it mean you should go to the left and up or straight down? Apparently you should go straight down even if arrow shows up – learnt it the hard way by first trying to get up.
  • No indications to explain certain experiences. Finally I get to the little room where I see no more baggage claim signs, but what I see is the train. Train going to other terminals, I assume. I hesitate, look around for more signs or where is the baggage claim as I just want my bag, not to fly somewhere else (even if I wish I could at that point) and an angry airport worker tells me to get on the train. And I tell “I need to get to the baggage claim” and he shows me the train and says angrily “This is the baggage claim”. I am already a bit frustrated by this – how could I know to take the train? So, I murmur back while getting on “No, this is the train”. A little bit of human understanding would be nice in this service: add a note that you need to take the train to get there rather than show the train and tell it’s baggage claim. It’s not. It’s the ridiculous train.
  • Green signs for forbidden exit. I reached the baggage claim. Got my bag and looked around – it was a big room with windows and doors and could see people walking outside in the parking lot. Would not expect to get out this easily usually – we always have to pass passages and official arrivals are in the airport, however, this time I decide to check if it’s some kind of shortcut because the doors have green signs on them. Only getting closer I see that actually if I opened this, I’d trigger an alarm and it’s just an emergency exit:
    32405524_10216146622644828_8922115278297366528_n.jpg
    Usually forbidden alarm controlled doors or emergency only exits are with red, so why is it green? I walked back from the door and managed to eventually leave the airport in a different way.

This experience I may not have noticed before, I may have taken it for granted or as is, but the more I work in tech, the more I realise that all we do and create is for people. It is not okay to make your users confused with bad design & usability. 

Why should we care about usability?

As QAs very often we get to see the whole image of the product/service. This adds a lot of responsibility to aim to feel the same way about the product as our users. The challenge here is that being involved in the actual development we know why certain design/tech choices were done in a certain way, and, this may add a familiarity bias and make us take things the way they are. However, we have to remember that products are developed for certain users and this means that their quality very often will be evaluated by feelings. As the saying goes:

People very often don’t remember what you did, but they remember how you made them feel. 

So, make sure to question usability and design. Catch any kind of feelings you may have about the experience and voice them. And, for the best result – get to know the actual users in order to understand their feelings.

P. S. Ironically, in order to write this post I had to login to my wordpress account and I was annoyed a bit again about user experience:

Screen Shot 2018-05-13 at 11.59.35Why would the field say “Email Address or Username” when only username is allowed? I used the correct e-mail and managed then to send a link to the very same e-mail and login via click there (as I could not guess the username field). This just sums up on how you should always think twice about the design: how users will interact with your product and feel afterwards. 

2017 in Review: Public Speaking, Amazing Testing Community & Self-Growth

“And, when you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you to achieve it.” –  Paulo Coelho, The Alchemist

This quote sums up 2017 for me pretty well: with hard work, determination and motivation some of my dreams materialized and I met amazing people who were willing to help me reach my dreams as well. I will slice up this blog post to milestone-like sections. 

From unaccepted speaker to accepted-to-every-one-I-applied-to

I kicked off 2017 reflecting on how I failed getting accepted to speak at conferences. I had a few useful lessons after my first abstract got rejected 5 times, and, I felt like I learned them – I had a bubbling new idea of what I should talk about. Something that I actually know best – my own story.

Don’t try to reinvent the topic and present something far away from your work – best stories are your own and there is a lot for people to learn from them

So, I created a new abstract called “Testing Big Data to Predict Your Perfect Fit”. I was surprised that sometimes it takes just a question to get some support from the experts: there were so many people who proof-read the abstract and were open to give feedback (Speak Easy, for example, introduced me to the wonderful Nancy Kelln). Once the abstract was ready, I submitted to 3 conferences.

I got invited to speak at all of them: Testing Cup 2017 in Gdansk, Poland, Quest for Quality 2017 in Dublin, Ireland and EuroSTAR 2017 in Copenhagen, Denmark! The last one being the biggest European testing conference with around 4-5 speaking tracks at the same time.

Before the very first talk I was so nervous that I couldn’t even sleep the night before. Technically I had some difficulties, but once it was over – the feeling was wonderful! I received great feedback, it was so rewarding to have audience members come to you and tell you that you inspired them or just to talk to you about work problems they have. I felt like I broke the ice and that was absolutely right!

Once you start stepping outside your comfort zone and deliver your first international talk at a conference – it gets better and you feel more comfortable

Quest for Quality’s experience I loved the most (thoughts on why it was the conference of the year for me). Theme spoke to me, talks were very interesting and the fellow speakers and audience in general were lovely people. I really wanted to deliver the best I could and it worked – the audience and my talk definitely clicked. I was voted the best talk of Quest For Quality 2017 with a rating of 4.61/5!

EuroSTAR was a great learning opportunity as it was a very big conference and I could meet a lot of people, but I did not feel the same click as at Q4Q conference. I met wonderful people there, heard good stories, but it wasn’t as cozy as smaller conferences.

In general, I loved public speaking – it was a great challenge. It taught me more about myself and enabled me to meet like-minded people. I am definitely thinking of some talks for 2018 now as well.

Give it a go at public speaking – it will help you grow

Meeting the old & new heroes

Participating in multiple conferences, meetups and online communities I got to meet so many amazing people. That is the best thing that happened to me this year.

Get to know the testing community – be it at conference, meetup or just online gathering. There are so many inspiring people with whom you can bond almost instantly

Imagine that you get to meet Michael Bolton who has been your inspiration since you started your testing career, you exchange stories and he looks at you and says “Impressive, you are going to be big”. It leaves you speechless. And there are so many known faces in conferences – having a chance to meet them in real life is unbelievable. Most of those people are so helpful and friendly that it will give you a kick of extra motivation to reach your dreams.

What surprised me more than known heroes were people of whom I hadn’t heard before. There are so many inspiring, wonderful professionals who add up to the experience of conferences or communities.

Looking at photo archives, I see this heart-warming picture from Quest For Quality conference. With 4 out of 6 people around me here I kept in touch and plan to continue doing so – if you ever meet any of these beautiful humans, tell them a warm hi – they are awesome!

20171003_204208-001

Also, online testing community has been such a great discovery – a lot of great people in testing are open, friendly and willing to share experiences!

Thank you to every single person I got to meet in 2017 – I am very grateful for every encounter!

Shift from Omega tester towards QA role at my work

For more than 2 years, I was a lone tester or as James Bach calls them Omega Tester. I worked a lot spreading testing awareness in general, not only building automation checks from scratch or getting to participate in groomings/plannings and collaborating a lot with other departments.

This year has been pretty generous to me as I got a new team member! So, now, I am shifting more to the QA role in a sense that I can actually ASSESS quality more – I use New Relic to monitor and spot quality issues we may be having. This ability has given me a lot of knowledge about the product, in-depth understanding of the internals and even got me invited to priority meetings with CEO, account manager and the head of engineering. I am becoming more of a quality professional (which I do love a lot) even if I still do a bunch of testing as well, but my new colleague now helps me out with most of the tasks and we can distribute accordingly. I think it was one of the main lessons in my career:

Clear communication, collaboration between teams and being open to everyone has helped me grow and learn a lot about the product

When it comes to testing, I also got to finally play around more with APIs this year and learn more about back-end. That was so fascinating that I would love to learn more about it in 2018.

2017 in Numbers

My personal numbers:

  • Speaker at 3 international conferences
  • Multiple amazing professionals in testing met at conferences/communities
  • QA & Testing department doubled (from 1 person to 2!)

My blog’s numbers:

  • 7 post published
  • 1404 unique visitors – record number since the start of my blogging
  • 2033 views – second in place after 2016 when I did 30 Days of Testing challenge
  • 338 people read the most popular post: Dear tester! Others care about quality, too.

Resolutions in 2018?

After 2017’s challenges with public speaking, I definitely want to speak again at a conference (or a few). I am researching biases right now. I want to do a talk related to our own and other people’s biases. Especially working as testers we get to deal with that a lot! A practical talk of stories and tips (if you have some stories to share on what you faced related to systematic errors and/or dealt with it –  I’d love to hear them!) .

Apart from that, I am aiming to continue occasional blogging and also learn more about APIs!

Dear tester! Others care about quality, too.

Dear tester,

I know that sometimes it feels like people you work with just want to mark the cards in JIRA as Done without proper testing. Sometimes they tell others “…once it passes the QA” or create tasks for you subjected “QA X” like it is being done just because “they have to”. The feeling of annoyance caused by urgency to complete the task immediately without reporting any bugs is inevitable because of the way they tell just to “pass the QA”. I did write of that before on why “pass the QA” makes me cringe, so I can feel your pain really well. Especially, that even after me trying to explain QA vs Testing vs Checking many times in my company and clarifying, the very same wording is still being used. I would like to share with you a story that happened to me which made me think that sometimes we exaggerate a little bit assuming that others do not care of quality as much as we do.

Today one of developers in my company came back with initial implementation and results to “QA”. The task was fairly simple – there is a lot of data generated by an algorithm and we should check it (I’m using here check consciously as it’s not really testing at this point): does it make sense, what patterns of fault we notice, does algo actually work? All of this should evaluate the quality of results produced by this new algorithm.

The wording of this task’s formulation and documentation with the data had QA mentioned around 5 times in various forms and I’m sure you are familiar with most of them: “data to be QAed”, “for the QAing” or my least favorite “pass the QA”. These terms do not feel too good as they are not correctly used and it may feel slightly insulting sometimes that your colleagues may not bother to even understand what you’re doing. However, you cannot teach all people to use the terms and it’s important to let it go sometimes. Remind yourself that we all have biases (and I do have a story on Managing your biases which made me slow down a little bit before judging). I decided not to exaggerate and think from that developer’s point of view: we both know what he wants as a result – the quality should be evaluated even if he is using the wrong terms.

Some colleagues may use the wrong terms and confuse testing/checking/QA, but don’t go and nit-pick on that. Words matter, but not everyone cares either how to name the rose: all you can do as an empathic quality specialist is to show people that you are open to explain to them, but only if they want to. 

This is not why I’m writing to you, though – this colleague of mine may have used the wrong wording, but letting go of that wasn’t the main takeaway I got.

When the colleague created the task description, it lacked one thing: any description of implementation details of algorithm. No documentation was yet created, no code mentioned, only thing provided was the generated data and vague explanation what should be done (compare columns and say if it’s okay or not using some human sense and research on each of options).

I really wanted to see implementation details: how else can I assess actual risks? Maybe there are areas and patterns that are design flaws and can be seen before even looking at the data generated. This developer tends to work alone as well, so there isn’t much of code review going on.

When I asked if there is any documentation on this algorithm, this was the response I got from the developer:
“Not yet, this is not ready for production yet. When it passes QA there will be a documentation page with all the changes that have come out of the QA process.”

This wasn’t something that I expected to be honest – I replied that to do the QA process we need to know the implementation details and this shouldn’t be made visible only when the algo goes to production. We shouldn’t check in the dark.

My reply has made this developer write to me personally and the words that were used by them again were a little bit rough I could say. The arguments on why the documentation wasn’t created were that “it is too big overhead” and then eventually “it seems that we disagree on the QA process here: for this task, there is no need for implementation details”. How would you react to this, my dear tester? Developer is claiming that as someone who is hired to test and give quality evaluations you shouldn’t look at implementation details at all.

As someone who recently encountered several design flaws in built products which caused issues and could have been spotted years ago, I felt ridiculed. Of course testers or QA (whatever way people want to call these specialists) should see implementation details. Is this developer really thinking that their design and implementation is perfect that we should look just at the results produced?

Issues can be spotted when getting to know algorithms and implementation: you may spot a logical error which causes certain bugs before you even look at the data obtained from running the algorithm

I stood my ground then, though. I tried to explain that I would love to see the implementation because it will help me to do the “QA processes” faster, more efficient and may display me some of issues before I actually look at the data. I want to be familiar with what it is actually doing.

And, to my surprise, it worked. This very same developer who was fighting that QA does not need any details on implementation shared with me the code they wrote to produce the results. It turns out that they thought I needed detailed documentation, but even code was enough which could easily be provided.

In the end, I realized that I could have given up. I could have closed myself up and exaggerated thinking that it’s only me who cares about proper quality judgement and people just assign tasks blindly without even considering that there may be issues in their logic of implementation. I could have felt hurt by the words used and impressions I got from this person, but in the end, even if we spoke in different terms, we both aim to finalize quality assesment (not to pass the QA, just understand if this implementation is good enough). I stood up for myself trying just to do my job better and I got help even if it took an extra step.

So, dear tester, believe that your colleagues are there to help you – you all want your products to be successful and of great quality. It is not only you, just sometimes others don’t know what you exactly need to do your tasks – open yourself up and ask for it. Only by sharing your needs and communicating you can make others understand your tasks better. 

 

 

 

Impressions of “How to Break Web Software” by Mike Andrews and James A. Whittaker

Everyday testing for me involves Web Software, to be precise, I mainly test a Web Service. At work we have a company book shelf and there were no surprises to encounter  “How to Break Web Software: Functional and Security Testing of Web Applications and Web Services” by Mike Andrews and James A. Whittaker. As it was the only testing related book in the shelf at that point – I decided to read it.

This book was written in 2006 so you can imagine that a lot has changed since! Web Software is bigger than ever. Even a regular website may use multiple web services. I did smirk a lot on some of the terms like Web Bugs (I never heard this term before: it would always be called a tracker or a tracking pixel in my environment). Also, to be honest, some of the tools or examples including IE6 made me cringe a little bit and felt a bit outdated, but…

“How to Break Web Software” gives very good foundation for Security Testing Web Software. I haven’t had much experience with Security Testing except for  one of the days in the 30 Days of Testing where I got to play around with Gruyere.

SQL injection, cross-site scripting, session hijacking and cookie poisoning (web cookies not the ones you brought to work to your colleagues as advised in “Explore It”) are just a few attacks which are in this book. Attacks have very clear structure: when to apply it, how to conduct it and how to protect from it.

Not only that the book describes attacks clearly, but it explains the way Web Software works and introduces its terms and technologies. I realized that the last chapter called Web Services would have been like a gold mine for me from the first day when I started working here. It describes technologies I have to work with daily.

“How to Break Web Software” gave me a better understanding of Web Software and even how to be safer in the Web applying some tips mentioned in the book. The attack descriptions were a great way to learn about the testing techniques heard about before, but the best way to learn them better is to apply them practically.

 

 

Why phrase “pass the QA” makes me cringe

Today I heard someone say “pass the QA” and in this post I will share why I believe that we should cross out this phrase from all dictionaries where it is included because it is just wrong use of definitions.

Let’s break this phrase into two parts: QA and pass.

What is QA?
I am talking here in a sense of quality assurance. Okay, that sounds clear, however, what is quality assurance?

A lot of people mix up QA and testing on a daily basis. There have been various discussions about it and I mostly lean towards the point of Michael Bolton in his post Testers: Get Out of the Quality Assurance Business. It was an eye opener blog post for me: my first job as a tester even had it in the title “Software Quality Assurance Analyst”. Later on, I turned into QA Engineer. However, I am a tester.

Michael Bolton in that blog post gives so many valid points, it’s like a gold mine. It is one of my favorite ever posts about testing. It basically stresses that as a tester you cannot really assure quality. You just inspect it and help to improve it. You test.

QA is not a person or the department of certain type of professionals. It is a task of everyone in the company to work towards assuring quality. Tester may play a huge part in it, but the actual “action” assurers of quality usually are programmers because they actually are making changes to the quality level. And, let’s not forget the main part:

Assuring quality is an ongoing task/goal of the company.

What does it mean to pass?

In testing passing the test means that the test has passed based on its acceptance criteria.

Test may be built from multiple specific test cases or lead by charters. However, the defined acceptance criteria should be clear.

Passing of tests could be related to the common question in testing: how much is it enough to test? Sometimes the answer is not that obvious. There may be various scenarios, explorations to be made and a common standard should be discussed with product management team on what are the requirements and if edge cases should be addressed for the initial release/iteration.

Why don’t I like the phrase “pass the QA”?

After explaining both parts of this phrase, I can say that for me saying “pass the quality assurance” makes almost no sense.

Quality assuring is an ongoing task, so it is never going to end. You cannot pass the quality assurance as it is, but you can pass the test.

I do understand the intent of this phrase and why it was used: it was meant to say that testing will be completed with no show-stopper issues and will pass the acceptance criteria.

Let’s not underestimate the power of wording. Saying “pass the QA” can definitely be misleading. However, sad news are that this term is quite popular to describe the teams of testers. In this case, let’s spread the awareness of the differences between QA and testing – we all are doing QA in the company, but only testers do testing as their full time job (programmers do a fair deal of testing as well, but it is not their main responsibility usually).

 

 

 

Non-tester, come to testing meetups! – Day 26 of 30 Days of Testing

INVITE A NON-TESTER TO A TEST EVENT

In one of previous challenges I created a post on how to find testing events. Today’s challenge is half done knowing which event you’d like to invite people to.

So, to any of non-testers reading this, I would like to kindly invite you to come to Budapest’s QA meetup’s palinQA events! Upcoming one will happen in September.

Great part about this meetup is that each time we have some non-testers joining us. A lot of topics are very interesting even if you’re not a tester. A great example of this is the latest meetup we had on Making a QA Career. Not only that the audience had testers who wanted to know more about job opportunities, but also people who are interested in the QA career, or, even non-testers (who possibly won’t change their career) come to listen to what qualities should testers have and how it feels to start a career as a tester.

Join a testing meetup and come to get to know the breed of testers: how they feel, what challenges they face and it will definitely give some insight to their work. The more insight there is – the better team we can create.

50bugsevery

Getting to know more testers – Day 24 of 30 Days of Testing

CONNECT WITH A TESTER WHO YOU HAVEN’T PREVIOUSLY CONNECTED WITH

30 Days of Testing definitely introduced me to multiple testing community members whom I did not connect with before. It has been very rewarding to feel the sense of community!

Nevertheless, today I spent some time connecting to possible speakers for Budapest QA meetup. Sometimes it can be very tough to find new speakers, so a lot of research has to be put in it. So, I have looked at some nearby testing meetups and connected to some of the organizers/speakers from there.

A wonderful thing was that I got very positive replies and now we will try to keep in touch to make sure to arrange a talk when they are here.

If you are interested in speaking at Budapest’s QA meetup and tend to come here sometimes – let me know, we would like to get to know you.

600_442114348

Rebirth as an Omega Tester

Last time I wrote an entry in this blog was 2 years ago. Definitely, a lot has changed and it’s time for a rebirth.

Reasons why I got silent were simple: I got tired at my work, it became monotonous and lacking of challenges (later reasons became simpler: I forgot about the blog, it was not a habit anymore and I was pretty busy).

More than a year ago, I decided to look for a new job. With a bit of luck and accidents, I stumbled upon an ad for a first full-time software tester in a startup. As I have met all of the requirements and job sounded challenging enough, I just had to apply even if it was based in other country (where I have never been before).

Response was quick and inspiring: I got homework (I always think it’s a great sign of a company – you can prove yourself with actual task). After that, I had multiple Skype interviews and… quit my job (which is definitely a tough thing to do when it’s your first job), packed my bags and moved to a new land of opportunities.

I must tell you that this change was the happiest change in my life. Now it’s more than a year that I work as an only full-time tester in a promising and exciting startup! I have many stories to share, so, it’s about time to make a rebirth.

Changing from manual tester executing test scripts in a big international company to being a sole tester in a (sometimes chaotic) startup is a huge difference, but, oh boy, how worth it is! Advice for you:

If you ever wake up at least a couple of days in a week thinking “I don’t like my work and don’t want to go there” – it’s about time to change your work. New opportunities are around the corner waiting for you.

And, if you find yourself wondering, why did I call myself an Omega tester, there is a great article by James Bach: Omega Tester: Testing with a Team One. Definitely worth reading it!