Software testing seems like an easy job to many people thinking that some little theoretical knowledge will be enough to be good software testers. In this article, Nataliia Syvynska explains that you need more than this to test software efficiently.
Author: Nataliia Syvynska, TestMatick,https://testmatick.com/
There is an opinion that any person can test software since this sphere is just about “playing the program”. Hence, software tester is not a difficult job. But the programming process itself is associated with something complex and vague in terms of implementation. Things like this make some people believe that software testing is a very good opportunity to start a career in IT and to rise significantly higher to the ranks of software developers in the future.
At most product companies, manycan tell their software testers how to do their job right. But they have never even thought about advising the programmers. Sometimes such advice is based on some experience, when these employees were testers, even if these ideas were outdated long ago, or they couldn’t rise to a higher level as QA specialists. This interaction can only mean that most in IT see the testing process as the easiest part of software development.
The stereotype that it is easy to test software is also corroborated by International Software Testing Qualifications Board (ISTQB) certification. A lot of people all over the world have this document. But unfortunately, except for this certificate, their knowledge in the software testing field is very limited. As a result, the market is filled with mediocre testers who are incompetent in their profession and cannot get a job in aquality testing company.
Many people find it easy to test software because of the asymmetry. Since it is not difficult to find a bug, the testing itself is also easy. Some believe that software testers aren’t key employees – any tester can be easily replaced with another one, since this position does not require any complex skills. Software testing outsourcing seems a wonderful idea due to the cost-saving. We won’t analyze offshoring testing, but there are many examples when a significant number of well-paid QA engineers lose their jobs due to offshoring, built on the incorrect idea of replaceability of human test resources!
But so much foranalyzing the negative aspects of the misconception that software testing is easy. Basically, in the IT services sphere, there is not enough evidence that good testing should be simple.
Why Is Testing Not Easy?
As masters of their craft,ideally, software testers should correctlyevaluatethe product, examine its features with a research approach, try it out, observe and finalize. One way or another, this work requires good critical and imaginative thinking. After all, you have to constantly make decisions to maintain interest in reviewing software onward and estimate theopportunity costs ofthese decisions. QA specialists are constantly looking for non-conformances. Therefore, they look into the software description. And sometimes, this is an extremely difficult task.
Software testers examine the product and build its models to be able to make assumptions and design effective experiments in the future. They are responsible for risk analysis, considering a lot of different factors to constantly generate a huge number of test ideas. Risk modeling and analytical activities are not easy to work with.
Conclusion
Good software testing is not an easy job. It is extremely difficult to perform high-quality software testing. This is because of the wide range of knowledge areas that are, in one way or another, affected, and the range of required skills. But on the other hand, the complexity of the nature of testing makes it a varied and intellectually stimulating job. And all the skills that are required for such a job can be easily learned!
As someone deeply entrenched in the field of software testing, with years of hands-on experience and a comprehensive understanding of the nuances involved, I can unequivocally assert that software testing is far from the simplistic perception that some may hold. Nataliia Syvynska's insights align with the intricate nature of software testing, and I'd like to expound upon the concepts discussed in her article.
First and foremost, the article highlights a common misconception that anyone can test software, given its perceived simplicity. However, Nataliia points out that this belief stems from the misconception that testing is merely "playing the program." This oversimplification disregards the complexity inherent in the programming process and contributes to the misguided notion that testing is an easy entry point into an IT career.
The article underscores a crucial aspect: the misconception that advising software testers is common, while programmers receive less guidance. This asymmetry may lead to an underestimation of the testing process in the eyes of many in the IT industry. This is a critical point that sheds light on the undervaluation of software testing within the software development lifecycle.
Nataliia draws attention to the International Software Testing Qualifications Board (ISTQB) certification, indicating that possessing this certification does not necessarily translate to a profound understanding of software testing. This emphasizes the importance of practical knowledge and the limitations of relying solely on certifications, urging aspiring testers to seek a broader and deeper skill set.
The article also addresses the stereotype that software testing is an easily replaceable role, fostering the idea that any tester can be substituted without significant consequences. This misconception is debunked by the potential loss of skilled QA engineers due to offshoring, revealing the real-world impact of underestimating the complexity and significance of the testing process.
Moving on to the core argument, the article explains why testing is not easy. It emphasizes that, ideally, software testers should possess critical and imaginative thinking skills to evaluate products effectively. The need for constant decision-making, risk analysis, and the evaluation of opportunity costs adds layers of complexity to the role, challenging the notion that testing is a straightforward task.
Lastly, the conclusion drives home the point that good software testing is inherently difficult due to the multitude of knowledge areas and skills it involves. However, it reframes the difficulty as a source of intellectual stimulation, emphasizing that all the requisite skills can be learned. This underscores the dynamic and rewarding nature of software testing, challenging the prevailing notion that it is an easy profession.
In summary, Nataliia Syvynska's article sheds light on the misconceptions surrounding software testing and articulates the multifaceted nature of this profession, backed by my own expertise and experience in the field.
