Introduction
Drawing from my extensive experience as a product manager, my involvement in test case management tools, and experience as an Agile development trainer for companies, I provide insights rooted in industry best practices. Whenever feasible, I draw upon real-world examples from QA experts to illustrate the underlying issues and practical techniques for overcoming obstacles in your day-to-day operations. By adopting these recommendations, you can reduce inter-departmental friction and improve the speed and quality of your development.
Key Challenge: Shifting from Waterfall to Agile
Transitioning from Waterfall to Agile methodologies has been a significant challenge for many testing organizations. While development teams have largely adopted Agile practices, QA teams sometimes still adhere to Waterfall processes. This persistence is often blamed on the need for validation testing. Additionally, many companies use outsourced QA resources that rely on defined scopes of work (SOWs). A final challenge for some companies is the need for third-party validation testing from the FDA, Entrust, an app store, or an OEM.
Regardless of the reasons, there are substantial benefits to be gained by aligning testing efforts with ongoing development activities. Even if validation is needed before release or publishing there is a significant advantage to pairing QA with development teams to catch issues in the early stages.
A senior QA engineer will be familiar with common application issues that impact quality, and a junior QA engineer might be the first person that ever sees the software with a fresh pair of eyes.
Striking a Balance Between Documentation, Coverage, and Agility
Determining the optimal timing for testing and how to document it presents a challenge for many QA teams in Agile. While traditional Waterfall approaches emphasize extensive documentation before testing begins, Agile methodologies advocate for early and parallel engagement with engineering teams. In Agile development, the feature set frequently evolves, and there is no static Product Requirement Document (PRD) to base a test plan on.
User Stories as a Framework for Testing
To address the challenge, QA teams can leverage the user stories within the sprints as a testing framework to expedite the testing process. As developers resolve individual tickets, QA can conduct feature testing. If the feature is still evolving, ad hoc testing can be employed. Conversely, if the feature will be finalized within the sprint, a formal test case can be developed and integrated into a new test suite. This also provides an opportunity for QA to assess which manual and automated test suites might be effected. Having the ability to manually validate existing test suites is highly beneficial since automation testing frequently breaks when new features are introduced.
Embracing the “Shift Left” Approach
Embracing the “Shift Left” movement, which advocates for early integration of QA processes in the development cycle, is crucial. By testing in parallel with development, QA teams can identify and address issues sooner, reducing the likelihood of last-minute roadblocks.
Reflecting on past experiences underscores the importance of proactive testing practices in avoiding catastrophic issues. By remaining vigilant and continuously improving skills, teams can mitigate risks and strive for excellence in their development endeavors.
By testing the individual test cases within the sprints, you can track the building of the test plan along with the sprint reducing delays after a release candidate (RC) is created.
Conclusion
By embracing Agile methodologies, fostering collaboration between QA and development teams, and leveraging automation tools, organizations can enhance the efficiency, speed, and quality of their software development processes. Through proactive testing practices and continuous improvement efforts, they can mitigate risks and strive for excellence in delivering high-quality products to market.