Is It Time to Say Goodbye to Manual Testing? | TechWell

Is It Time to Say Goodbye to Manual Testing?

Over the last few years, the prestige of testing has increased, with particular stress being laid on software automation testing. What is so special about automation that teams and organizations find so desirable?

To start with, if you perform it correctly, automation allows precise and consistent executions on all iterations. It allows you to save time and make ideal use of your resources with constant and ongoing test executions. With automation, the use of machines and a number of other setup peripherals can be maximized while covering a wide test case range. Automation allows you to execute tests in resolute capabilities that are only possible with a machine, negating all instances of human error.

In the context of automation, a number of testing phrases may be used, such as sanity tests, security tests, acceptance tests, system tests, and functional tests. In one way or another, automation tests prove functional in the performance of these testing scenarios. And in some particular cases, like that of regression tests and load tests, automation is deemed to be the ideal solution.

However, there are certain testing scenarios where automation does not prove handy. Exploratory testing is one such instance. Automated tests require documented, predictable flows, whereas in exploratory testing, the process is undocumented, unpredictable, and scriptless. Because a number of bugs are encountered in this test execution method, automating this test at the risk of leaving out these bugs before the software release is not recommended. Manual testers tend to be familiar with the tested application and aware of the pitfalls so they can explore the system and know exactly where to look for the hidden bugs.

Conventional testing methods are executed in strict correlation to the testing documentation. The success criteria are clearly defined, with pass/fail annotations used for measuring the outcomes. If you are employing usability testing practices, the tester starts by stating the problem, then explaining what he thinks is wrong with the system. As a result, usability testing is another scenario where test automation does not hold ground; automation is designed for dichotomous distinctions between success and failure, while usability offers an outcome that is abstract, descriptive, and often arguable.

Though automation testing is more than satisfactory for many scenarios, there are a number of reasons manual testing should not be neglected. An organization will not allow a product to be released without verifying and testing it properly, and manual testers are crucial to ensuring that the delivery’s quality is acceptable.

Having said that, software is one industry that demands everyone keep themselves up to date about the latest, most advanced technologies. While manual testing is still a critical part of the overall testing routine, testers need to have the aspiration to keep themselves informed about the methodologies of testing automation.

This will ensure that testers continue to have a final say about a new product’s quality before their organization releases it into the commercial space.

Up Next

About the Author

TechWell Insights To Go

(* Required fields)

Get the latest stories delivered to your inbox every week.