Agile, testing and more frequent deliveries.

-
Yet another time I think I see people using word Agile wrong. Yet another guy claimed "we need to have more predictability and stability so I think we would go for Agile methodologies, Scrum in particular".

Nonsense.

I don't think that "predictability, stability, whatevershitability" has anything to do with Agile. If you start Agile transformation with such a goal you've already failed.
Agile is about maximizing value delivery rate in a state of uncertainty, that's pretty much what it is.

If your business is uncertain as hell why do you think that "predictability" with engineering teams is going to fix things? It is not.
Worse, if you make engineering teams predictable while having unpredictable environment, you will miss the whole point and make things worse while still thinking you're doing fine.

Nonsense.

An agile team is about removing management layers between engineering and customer, not making management happier.

Having an ability to communicate with the customer we can deliver features customers think they need faster.

Having an ability to communicate with the customer we can validate if what we built really can solve a customer's problem. That also would mean we don't have to kill ourselves testing feature we are not yet sure 100% needed.

Understanding that testing something we are not yet validated with the customer is a waste is a real reason why we can release more often. Why would you spend much time testing feature that may be removed next release?

Test automation plays much smaller role in Agile.
Jira dashboard plays much smaller role in Agile.
Predictability plays much smaller role in Agile.

Adaptability and communication are the keys.

Comments

  1. Jayesh WankhadeMarch 31, 2018 at 7:41 AM

    That's great article and the ones who doesn't have clear idea about Agile.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Test automation framework - do I need it at all?

-
Image
While there're lots of information published on the internet about how one should develop/buy a Test Automation solution, there's an elephant in the room - which is the fundamental question "Do I need to do it at all?". That is a good question. While I think that there’re some legitimate contexts where product/project/team can benefit from having a sophisticated test automation solution/framework, my general rule of thumb is “If you need a framework - you do it wrong” . There’re at least several decent papers showing the benefit of unit-testing ([1],[2], [3]), while I could not find any research proving that system level tests could bring better results. Please let me know if you can prove me wrong. There’s at least one half-scientific paper showing the benefits of unit tests in comparison to integration/system level tests [4] There’s a good paper bringing a notion of running/writing and maintaining test vs. the benefit of having/running it at...
Read more

Efficient test automation - Secret #1 | Test Club

-
Image
It seems everyone talks about efficient test automation, but not so many people have actually seen it! To cover this I decided to make several videos regarding the secrets of efficient test automation. Today we will talk about the first (and, arguably, the main) secret - realistic expectations. Very often, test automation projects or initiatives are started with the following unrealistic expectations: "Test automation will replace 'manual' testing" "Test automation will provide fast results and benefits" "Test automation efficiency depends solely on test automation engineers" Unfortunately, all those expectations are not realistic! Watch the video to know more!
Read more

An alternative to ubiquitous UI-level checking - Subcutaneous tests

-
Image
Let's assume a hypothetical situation - you were assigned to a project to help with the "test automation" initiative. You have a huge "test plan" as an input, containing hundreds (if not thousands) of "test cases" and you need to do something about it, quick. Problem statement Your first urge (if it is a Web application) may be to write some UI-level automated checks using tools like, you know, Selenium. In fact, there's a huge demand for such "Selenium test automators" in the industry these days. But please, please, don't do this. There're lots of things which make UI-level automated checking the least desirable approach: UI-level automated checks will be slow. There's just no way to avoid it. You can parallel them or do some other tweaks to speed them up somehow, but they still will be slow. UI-level automated checks will be flaky. Partly - because they're slow. Partly because Web browser and UI interface w...
Read more