RSS

Tag Archives: software testing

STANZ speaker profile: Jan Jaap Cannegieter

If you’re interested in testing you’ll want to hear what testing experts have to say on the subject. At this year’s STANZ (Software Testing Australia New Zealand conference) there will be presentations from four international testing experts. Each week we’ll tell you a little bit more about each of them. This week we’re introducing Jan Jaap:

About Jan Jaap

Jan Jaap is an extremely accomplished testing consultant, trainer and commentator. He is interested in testing, quality assurance and requirements. He is from the Netherlands and has worked for local government agencies, Dutch Tax Administration, various ministries, the Netherlands Chamber of Commerce, Postbank / ING, Rabobank, ABN AMRO, Corus, Central Book house, Swiss Life, Cordares, Achmea MortgageDutch National Railway, KPN, Tele2 and Ziggo.

Jan Jaap is a trainer who delivers courses and workshops in Quality Assurance in ICT and requirements. He has co-authored eight books and written several journal articles. He has spoken at international conferences such as Testnet, ESEPG, SPIder, PROFES, Dutch Testing Day, LaQuSo and Prince 2 User Group.

He is a member of the executive board of SYSQA B.V., an independent organization specialising in requirements, testing, quality assurance and process improvement. Within SYSQA he is responsible for knowledge management, product management and quality management.

Jan Jaap will be delivering a keynote presentation and workshop around the TMMi (Test Maturity Model integrated). He was part of the development group for TMMi level 4 and 5 and co-author of “The Little TMMi”, the first book in English about TMMi, so it’s a topic he knows a lot about.

Test Process Improvement: Testers Get Out of Your Cave!

Only by involving stakeholders outside of test processes will an improvement in the test processes be accomplished. The process areas we as testers can fully control are pretty mature. The process areas where we need other stakeholders like project management and general management are less mature. Consider results of Test Maturity Model (TMMi) Assessments and learn that if we want to make testing more mature, we have to get out of our cave.

TMMi (Test Maturity Model integrated): Valuable Practice with Quick Scans

This is a hands-on interactive session useful to all organisations and test groups. In this session Jan Jaap will demonstrate the Quick Scan tool which allows you to gauge your levels across a number of key areas which in turn allows you to discover where you should focus your efforts. By the end of the session you’ll know how to get the most out of Quick Scans to benefit your organisation.

During the workshop you’ll also have an introduction to the basics of TMMi, the history and structure, a comparison between TMMi and other test process improvement models.

Advertisements
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 2, 2011 in STANZ 2011

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

STANZ speaker profile: Goranka Bjedov from Facebook

If you’re interested in testing you’ll want to hear what testing experts have to say on the subject. At this year’s STANZ (Software Testing Australia New Zealand conference) there will be presentations from four international testing experts. Each week we’ll tell you a little bit more about each of them. This week we’re introducing Goranka:

 About Goranka:

Goranka is coming over to Australasia prepared to cause controversy with her keynote speech on The Future of Quality. She will also run a workshop teaching the skills to find and develop skilled testers.

Goranka is interested in performance, capacity and reliability analysis, as well as test planning. She is currently the Capacity Planning Engineer at Facebook but she has also spent five years performance testing at Google and worked for Network Appliance and AT&T Labs so she has lots of real world testing experience. Before becoming a tester she was an Associate Professor at the Purdue University Schools of Engineering so she’s pretty smart too.

Somehow Goranka has also found the time to write papers, presentations and two textbooks. She regularly speaks at conferences around the world and spoke at STANZ in 2007. After that event the feedback was so fantastic that we’ve been trying to get her back ever since and we’re very excited to see what she has to say this year.

The Future of Quality Keynote:

This talk addresses the impact of changes such as Cloud, Open Source and Software Complexity on testing and test professionals. Goranka has spent two years researching this topic and spoken to hundreds of testers about it.

The future can seem scary, with start-ups popping up everywhere working out how to offer the same product or service as you for less money by using Cloud or Open Source to drive down costs. At the same time established companies have extremely complex software systems within which it is almost impossible to isolate single layers and identify what they do. Goranka is going to discuss quality in the context of our changing world and technology. And when we say quality, it might not be what you have traditionally thought of as quality because quality the way you may currently think of it doesn’t count anymore. Find out why.

Testing Skills: How to Find and Develop Skilled Testers:

Anyone who has recruited in the testing space will be familiar with the following questions:

  • What are the characteristics and skills of good software testers?
  • How do you check or interview a person for a testing position?
  • What types of people make bad testers?
  • How do you develop potential, if you do not have an experienced team?

If you work in testing you’ll have no doubt come across other testers with incredibly varied levels of skill and knowledge. It can be a frustrating thing. Goranka will introduce simple methods of checking if someone has a developer or tester mindset. She’ll also give you a list of topics, games and exercises to sharpen the skills of your testing team.

Book your ticket for STANZ, go on, it’s going to be awesome!

In conclusion Goranka is a clever and engaging speaker who will deliver two useful and inspiring presentations. And she is only one part of a packed two-day conference, so go and book your ticket for STANZ.

Still need convincing? (man, tough crowd) Then watch this video of Goranka give a talk about open source tools for performance testing at Google:

Did you watch it? Great speaker, isn’t she? Now book your STANZ ticket. Thanks.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on July 27, 2011 in STANZ 2011

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

SoftEd and Revolution IT partner up!

Last month Software Education and Revolution IT became partners, which means we can offer our customers the same fantastic software testing and business training courses, now run even more frequently in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Adelaide, Auckland and Wellington.

Software Education have been training providers for over 20 years and we pride ourselves on having excellent trainers. Our testing trainers consistently score top marks from our customers for both their knowledge and teaching ability. For more information on our testing courses have a look on our website and get in touch with us to book a place.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on June 7, 2011 in Testing

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

36 Testing Heuristics

I was able to see James Bach at STANZ  2009 and one of his slides REALLY stood out. He called it the Thirty-Six Testing Heuristics, and he uses it as checklist or reminder of the key things that need to be considered in testing anything. Sounds good huh? Well here we go:

cidtestdsfdpotcrusspicstmplfdsfscura

Everyone got that? Any problems understanding? LOL – it is just a quick way of listing the following things…a checklist to help focus your thinking:

Group 1 – cidtestd = Customers, Information, Developer relations, Team, Equipment & Tools, Schedule, Test Items, Deliverables. These are the high level planning activities, the logistical and the “set-up” focus of the testing. This helps set the context in which the testing will be done.

Group 2 – sfdpot = Structures, Functions, Data, Platforms, Operations, Time. I also heard Karen N Johnson refer to this acronym as San Francisco Depot (SFDPOT). This allows you to understand the environment that you will be testing in, in terms of scope, resources and time – the key arms of the quality triangle. This is a vital part of testing in my opinion and one that we often forget to consider in detail.

Group 3 – crusspicstmpl = Capability, Reliability, Usability, Security, Scalability, Performance, Installability, Compatability, Supportability, Testability, Maintainability, Portability, Localisability. This is a great list of the quality characteristics of a system. I prefer ISO 9126 (it is shorter!) but this one gives excellent coverage of the key attributes that will need to be considered for any system. I really like the use of the “ity” at the end of almost all of these – keeps me focused on qual”ITY”.

Group 4 – fdsfscura = Function Testing, Domain Testing, Stress Testing, Flow Testing, Scenario Testing, Claims Testing, User Testing, Risk Testing, Automatic Testing. This list of the types of testing that may, could, should be done on a test project allows us to understand and explain that there is more than one way to test something, and to do it better we need to understand WHAT and HOW we are trying to test something.

Why do we care about this stuff? Well….I often find that people struggle to understand the “entirety” of testing…ie, all the stuff that needs to be considered when we do testing. This helps to outline it to people!

I recently presented a paper on Agile Test Estimation – and mentioned this aspect as well. No matter what lifecycle we are using – these things still need to be considered. And having an impressive party trick like this may just be the answer!

This is a great list, and I am going to be trying hard to remember it. If you see me, see if you can get me to repeat it and if I get it right!

posted by Sharon Robson

 
1 Comment

Posted by on September 17, 2009 in Quality, Testing

 

Tags: , ,

With Freedom comes Great Responsibilty

Whatever life holds in store for me, I will never forget these words: “With great power comes great responsibility.” This is my gift, my curse. Who am I?

I’m Spiderman.

As with Peter Parker, I see the same holding true with agile testing. I was recently delivered a course on agile testing and I found myself repeating the above phrase but substituted the word “power” with the word “freedom” – “With great freedom comes great responsibility.”

I see agile as an adaptable framework or more accurately, a set of principles, that allow testers (amongst the entire project team of course) to look outside the “box” (testing processes) and yet at the same time let the framework help guide the testing activities.

 There are of course, certain constraints within an agile project (particularly the duration of an iteration) which means that as a tester, you need not only have to be flexible but also efficient.

I have been on far too many projects that have followed a traditional pattern (analysis, design, code, test – wait that sounds almost like a waterfall) that, in hindsight, weren’t the most effective way of building software.

 Some succeeded, alot failed.

 One particular BUFD (Big Up Front Design) project had a physical separation of the core team (Analysts lived in one area, testers in another and development in another city). There was a distinct lack of collaboration let alone co-operation and a degree of animosity between testers and the analysts. There were numerous changes to the specification within a three month period which meant a re-write of a majority of test scripts (literally thousands of test scripts) – all this without even seeing a working prototype.

This project failed – it was a death march from the beginning which was obvious in hindsight.

 I wonder if this project would’ve fared better if it was developed iteratively? Who knows? Maybe we could’ve discovered the problems earlier (and abandoned the project earlier?) or maybe the physical separation was too big a huddle to overcome?

 Many questions with many hypothetical answers.

 This project suffered, from a testing perspective, from inflexibity. We all wrote test scripts (approximately 14 testers in the team) which kept changing. We adapted but we were no where near efficient. We clung to the “box” (the teams testing process) because that was all we knew. There was no great responsibility because the responsibility was mandated by the “box”.

 From an agile project perspective, the walls on the “box” can change quite quickly – one minute it’s a box, the other it’s a cube. This can be disconcerting for some for it appears that the fluidity of the “box” is chaos but what it really is, is freedom and “with freedom comes great responsibility!”

Good agile, agile done well appears to have a greater degree of freedom in the way testing is approached and performed but with this freedom comes disciple, structure, governance – this is the great responsibility. We value working software yet we don’t sacrifice goodness for sloppiness, constant velocity for speed or good practises for dogma.

 As testers, we understand that the project context helps determine our approach, the freedom to achieve this is based on the context which in turns helps us understand the responsibility we have in delivering our part of the bargain with the project team.

Posted by Brian Osman

 
3 Comments

Posted by on July 6, 2009 in Agile, Testing

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,