• About
  • Giving Back

aclairefication

~ using my evil powers for good

Monthly Archives: October 2011

Quality Is Undead

31 Monday Oct 2011

Posted by claire in Automation, CAST 2011, STARWest 2011, Testing Humor

≈ 6 Comments

QR Skull

Though many give credence to the sentiment that quality is dead, testers linger like ghosts with unfinished business who cannot move on from this plane. There is never as much time for testing as we would like and some of our bug reports are regarded with as much skepticism as messages from beyond the grave. We tend to haunt the developers with questions and carefully couched criticisms, and I daresay that some programmers might like to call for an exorcism.

We may think of ourselves as shuffling zombies toward the end of a long release cycle, when testing time is often sacrified for feature implementation and we can end up working long hours, though thrown under the bus may not be the worst way to go. Those carefully scrutinizing our exceptional strength to endure the inevitable crunch time, our keen powers of observation in uncovering bugs, and our cold appraisal of the software will realize our true nature and may start stocking up on stakes and garlic, peering into our cubes looking for the coffins where we sleep as we must surely be vampires instead. So far, I have no reports of testers biting co-workers, however tempting at times. After all, wouldn’t we want to pass on our dark gifts to our team mates, test-infecting them to become more like us?

Testing wants Braaaains

At STARWest 2011, James Whittaker and Jeff Payne heralded a dark future for testers without automation scripting skills. While I welcome the increasing testing prowess of software developers, their testing focus is on automation, whether at the unit level or something more closely approximating an end user’s interaction. I have started thinking of my automation test suite as my zombie horde: persistent but plodding on unthinking, repeatedly running into obstacles, requiring tending. It really want some brains to interpret the results, maintain its eccentricities, and perhaps play some games in the backyard shed. As Michael Bolton stated at CAST 2011, lots of automated checks versus doing human-observed testing is one of the hard problems of testing. “A computer executing automated tests only makes one kind of observation, it lacks human judgement.”

Even these fast zombies are not a replacement for the thinking mind of a tester, though how to think about testing is a question of much debate. Testers from different schools seem to regard one another with a bit of hostility. Each successive school of thought seems to bury the preceding one with great ceremony, including the departed’s whole entourage for the journey to the afterlife. Those thus interred seem like mummies, desiring a terrible vengeance on the ones disturbing their eternal rest or even grave-robbing their ideas. At CAST 2011, Michael Bolton encouraged us to take a more measured tone with people who disagree with us, referencing Cem Kaner’s sentiment that “reasonable people can disagree reasonably.”

Memento Mori

With the Day of the Dead celebration occurring this week, it seems fitting to ponder our own demise as testers. Those celebrating this holiday want to encourage visits by the dead, so the living can talk to them, remembering funny events and anecdotes about the departed, perhaps even dressing up as them. Some create short poems, called calaveras (“skulls”), as mocking epitaphs of friends, describing interesting habits and attitudes or funny anecdotes.

So here is a calavera for me:

Here lies our dear departed Claire Moss
We miss her because she could test like a boss.
When a defect appeared before her eyes,
Her lilting voice would intone “Hey guys…?”
At best, she was a code monkey,
but her sense of humor was always funky.
Though she claimed her heart was in her test,
we always know she loved us best.

I encourage you, the living, to visit me with events, anecdotes, or funny poems. Whatever undead creature your tester persona most identifies with, keep on pursuing excellence and have a happy Halloween!

Quality Stands Out

17 Monday Oct 2011

Posted by claire in Experiences

≈ 1 Comment

My fishie

One of the nice things about going to a science-fiction convention is that you blend into the crowd in your obscure-reference costume. You can go about your nerdy business without anyone stopping you every 5 seconds to ask for a photo op. At Dragon*Con this year, I spent much more time wandering the halls to take in the experience than following the programmed tracks of activities. One advantage of this was the premium people-watching. Some people who are passionate costumers never appear at any of the costuming panels or track sessions. Their costumes might not even fit through the doors of the track’s room!

When you’re wandering around strangely attired in public with your 40,000 closest friends, you will inevitably encounter someone else costumed as the same character. There is a moment of recognition that offers the chance for geeky high-fives and kudos for sharing your interest. The one problem with meeting geeks who get the references is they know their subject matter deeply and can spot inaccuracies in your garb. If you are attempting to replicate an iconic image of a character, they’ll spot deviations immediately. This reminds me of something Mike Lee said in his Making Apps That Don’t Suck talk: “There’s a good chance what you think is wrong with the product, no one else notices or cares about. … Your users are probably not nerds, unless you make software for people who make software and then only God can help you.” When faced with fanboys, you cannot slack off.

On the flip side, when your costume is high quality, people may not care about recognizing the nerdy reference and stop you every 5 seconds just to admire your workmanship. The design is so well-executed or intricate that they don’t care about the subject matter and just want to stare.

“If you want to be remembered, be memorable. If you want to stand out in the crowd, it helps to come up with something other than just looking like everybody else.” — Mike Lee

The real geek gold is in a high-quality obscure-reference ensemble that gets you both kinds of attention. [And if you can actually work popular culture into this mix, you’re golden.]

Big Fish in a Big Pond

I attacked the costuming problem in the same way I attack my testing: with the goal of having the best execution. I know that the users of my software are the nerds of their genre (niche market), much more intricately familiar with the nuances of their business than I. I know that missteps in the vital functions will not go unnoticed or unreported. The software must satisfy the production quality its highly specialized market demands. For niche markets, “the final product quality … is associated more with the specific needs that the product is aimed at satisfy.” (Wikipedia) I studied my source material, in this case Neil Gaiman’s Sandman graphic novels, and noted all the little tell-tale character attributes that must be preserved to be faithful to the design, or in this case the many designs.

However, I know that a faithful reproduction is not what I want to deliver. I want an unexpected element in my ensemble that would transform a good idea to great. I was tempted to purchase a fish balloon and carry that around the con, but I was much happier when I discovered a navigable fish blimp as the perfect accessory for my Delirium. Similarly, knowing what people (human oracles) say they want in their software is only the first step in satisfying their needs, so we cannot limit our testing to only the scenarios they state they want to execute but instead we must explore beyond the known. We can be advance scouts reporting back the plausibility of satisfying those unstated needs. “The essential value of any test case lies in its ability to provide information (i.e. to reduce uncertainty).” – Cem Kaner & James Bach

Then we can take a shot at that surprise and delight that Mike Lee advocates and really wow the crowd.

♣ Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

♣ Archives

  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • November 2018
  • August 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • March 2017
  • August 2016
  • May 2016
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • February 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011

♣ Categories

  • #testchat
  • Acceptance Criteria
  • Agile
  • Agile Testing Days USA
  • Agile2013
  • Agile2018
  • AgileConnection
  • Approaches
  • Automation
  • Better Software
  • CAST 2011
  • CAST 2012
  • CAST 2013
  • CAST2016
  • Certification
  • Change Agent
  • Coaching
  • Context
  • DeliverAgile2018
  • Design
  • Developer Experience
  • DevNexus2019
  • DevOps
  • Events
  • Experiences
  • Experiments
  • Exploratory Testing
  • Hackathon
  • ISST
  • ISTQB
  • Lean Coffee
  • Metrics
  • Mob Programming
  • Personas
  • Podcast
  • Protip
  • Publications
  • Retrospective
  • Scrum
  • Skype Test Chat
  • Social media
  • Soft Skills
  • Software Testing Club Atlanta
  • Speaking
  • SpringOne2019
  • STAREast 2011
  • STAREast 2012
  • STARWest 2011
  • STARWest 2013
  • Tea-time With Testers
  • Techwell
  • Test Retreat
  • TestCoachCamp 2012
  • Tester Merit Badges
  • Testing Circus
  • Testing Games
  • Testing Humor
  • Training
  • TWiST
  • Uncategorized
  • Unconference
  • User Experience
  • User Stories
  • Visualization
  • Volunteering
  • Weekend Testing

♣ Meta

  • Log in

Proudly powered by WordPress Theme: Chateau by Ignacio Ricci.