Archive

Posts Tagged ‘DET’

A new teams encounter with DET/TET as a framework for testing – Part 4-Facilitation

July 9, 2013 2 comments

First of all, I want to be clear that this series of posts have nothing to do with my work at Atlassian. These posts are experiences from previous assignments with Jayway, and I am just now gathering my thoughts on it.

Be sure to read the previous posts which has some background:
Part 1-Context
Part 2-Intro workshop
Part 3-The basics

Facilitation

The effort of having 12-14 people involved in testing 2 hours/week needs to be prepared and facilitated. This is something that I usually propose, and the need was acknowledged rather quickly in this team.

It ended up being a rotating task within the development team to take on the facilitator role of the week. However, it was usually natural for some person to be facilitator when it came to different focus areas. This also meant that some people got the facilitator role more often during the time I was there.

I personally coached the facilitator of the week through preparations and all the way through the test session, debrief and meta debrief. Here are some aspects of facilitation that we considered. Read more…

A new teams encounter with DET/TET as a framework for testing – Part 3-Running with the basics!

June 24, 2013 2 comments

First of all, I want to be clear that this series of posts have nothing to do with my work at Atlassian. These posts are experiences from previous assignments with Jayway, and I am just now gathering my thoughts on it.

Be sure to read the previous posts which has some background:
Part 1-Context
Part 2-Intro workshop

Basics

The basic principles of DET (Session, People, Focus and Reporting) are pretty easy to follow, so just doing it basic style will give some value. This is of course a place for a disclaimer, since running with the basics here would be similar to scrum, easy-to-follow rules that are just not so easy to follow. The sections below are about some aspects of the basics that we tweaked to fit the context. Read more…

A new teams encounter with DET/TET as a framework for testing – Part 2-Intro workshop

June 19, 2013 3 comments

First of all, I want to be clear that this series of posts have nothing to do with Atlassian. These posts are experiences from previous assignments with Jayway, and I am just now gathering my thoughts on it.

Be sure to read the previous post which has some context:
A new teams encounter with DET/TET as a framework for testing – Part 1-Context

The workshop

To get everyone on-board with what we were doing, I started off with a workshop on testing and quality in general. Read more…

A new teams encounter with DET/TET as a framework for testing – Part 1-Context

June 17, 2013 3 comments

Over the last year I have been asked many times about how to implement DET/TET at a new company. Since most of my experiences have been within Jayway where the concept is accepted, I have not been able to answer that question in a good way. This is my story of implementing DET in a company which had not been using it before or very much any other formal testing. Since i got the question, this company is not Atlassian, but my last assignment before my move.

In this first post I want to give some context about the assignment, the company and product and what we ended up doing. In the following posts I will highlight specific aspects that were relevant for this implementation in the new company.

Background

I was brought in as an Agile testing mentor to this company, which actually has no dedicated testers. Read more…

Learnings from Agile testing days 2012

November 29, 2012 1 comment

I was at Agile testing days in Potsdam as a speaker. The conference is quite a nice experience as a speaker. I don’t know the numbers, but I think it was about 500-600 people there and around 80 speakers I think. Small enough to be able to speak to most of the people that you want to speak to, as well as big enough to give the touch of diversity of people.

Most of the sessions I attended I tried to note down important stuff into mind maps. Although with highly varied results because of the contexts of my awareness and concentration during the session. (Here is an example through my live blogging from Pete Walens session). Its really is hard to maintain the discipline of good documentation as you go throughout a very long time. This is actually one of my pinpoints in my presentation; having people that are not used to test documentation to actually record the exploration done throughout sessions. And the fact that I am having troubles with it myself during a conference hints that it might not be so easy. Here are some highlights: Read more…

DET – The original mindmap

June 19, 2012 Leave a comment

I admit, inspired by the recent flood of mindmaps from ministry of testing I also wanted to post one.

The mindmap

Developers Exploratory Testing was created by my colleague Davor Crnomat. During the last years it has evolved as a practice in our company. As I am presenting about my experiences on it, I wanted to create an overview of the original rules. First time Davor presented these they were just a list of longer sentences. So to create the mind map I have shortened and grouped them. I have also realized that they are not all present in the latest articles written about it, but then again, it is the original that I have drawn. Read more…

Elaborating on DET – ETDD evolving?

January 5, 2012 11 comments

I got some positive response about DET that I wrote on my blog and in my CAST session proposal, so I thought I would elaborate a little on where I think this could be going. I will probably cover more hands on aspects in the coming weeks, but I really want to explain a vision I have around it first.

How about including the business stakeholders?

In my current project, I started to involve our main business stakeholders in our test sessions from the start when I got involved. And they have gotten really excited about attending once a week. Read more…

Developers exploratory testing – Expanding its value

December 17, 2011 6 comments

This post was also published on my company blog.

There is a common practice in our company to perform Developers Exploratory Testing sessions, explained by my colleague Davor here. The cool thing is that this way of performing higher level testing has actually become accepted by our developers, and they really enjoy it.

In my current work of developing our organization wide practices for quality, I have made a deep dive into how DET is carried out on a regular basis. What I have seen is that DET is accepted and acknowledged as a valuable practice, however it is not really carried out in its full potential. There are many details and aspects of it to work on, especially regarding reporting and follow-up.

The other day I was asked to help one of our teams with a DET session. Read more…

Exploratory Testing – Testers way to being agile?

December 16, 2009 7 comments

When I first skimmed this headline and then the post, I thought that this guy had the same thoughts on the subject as me. But reading it a couple of times made me realized that the post was not about the same as I was thinking about at the time. Although I acknowledge everything in it as good stuff, and very much on the path of DET (Developers Exploratory Testing) that my colleague Davor spoke about at Öredev in Malmö and ExpoQA in Madrid this year.

With my post, I have a slightly different perspective on it, which has been growing in my mind and discussed in some different settings with some friends.

The other day I asked a dear friend/colleague of mine what he thought of when I said the words:
“explore>learn>adapt and then explore again”
He directly responded with: “Thats agile!”

To be clear on this, he is a very knowledged and skilled developer and scrum master, but like many developers he still has the eyesheds of not looking too much at the testing perspective on things more often than sometimes.

So what is the difference then between being agile as a tester and doing exploratory testing? And why does my colleague associate the same words with being agile, and big parts of the testing community would say its ET. I dont see much of a difference actually. In James Bachs rapid software course this is the summary of what ET is: “by treating learning, test design and test execution as mutually supportive activities that run in parallell throughout the project. ” To me thats pretty much like the shorter and more concise wording I asked my friend.

In a project I am in now, I have to deliver a test specification as a product of the testing. So how do I do? Well, I explore the product in some way to learn how it works, design my tests and document in my specification and at the same time execute and adapt to my next step of exploration. I would say that in my case, I am doing ET, and those are the exact words I asked my friend about. The funny thing here is that the wording had to be neutral from the word test, for him to understand the meaning of them being agile, but for the testing context they are the same as ET, at least in my opinion.

I know that most people that think of ET, think of a scenario where the exploration is done manually through a gui, like on a web page. I acknowledge that as ET as well, but I think that this common understanding of ET comes from the simplicity of describing it like this. That kind of description I think is the most common among developers trying to understand ET.

The harder thing to understand about this, is to see the testing as the iterative feedback loop that it actually is, which responds to the feedbacks of developing with TDD or actually any agile process. The loops are just different in size and visibility. In my project some of the loops are 5 minutes and sometimes it takes a whole day. For exploring a web site, the feedback is mostly about seconds.

To conclude the post, why not just call exploratory testing being an agile process approach to testing, instead of an approach to testing within an agile process. The latter being the most common description I have seen when talking about agile testing. You see the difference?