Quality is no coincidence

Quality as an attitude means that software quality is not created by simply working through test cases, but by a lived practice in the entire team. Three factors contribute to this: Test fundamentals, test automation and human attitude. Good testers know methods such as equivalence partitions or boundary value analysis, can evaluate AI-generated results and actively communicate with all project participants.

Key Takeaways

• Quality as an attitude means that good testers do not have to operationalize quality, but simply live it: they can no longer say how much testing they do because it has become a matter of course.
• Test principles remain indispensable, because even those who use AI-generated test cases need the professional judgment to evaluate whether the result is actually any good.
• Software quality is a people business: trust in test results is created by people who vouch for a test report with their name, not by automated systems.
• The podcast Software Testing emerged from a blog series on the Future of Testing, which two interviewees preferred to discuss via video call instead of writing texts, which gave rise to the idea of the interview format.
• Testers are often seen as the center of project knowledge: Other roles come to them to have them explain how their own application works because testers are particularly broadly networked due to their cross-questions.

Quality as an attitude beats quality as a task list

Quality has the strongest effect when a team lives it instead of working through it. Richard Seidl describes a difference that determines whether testing works in projects: A team that writes test cases, maintains scripts and imports test data is working on a different level than a team for which quality is a matter of course.

This attitude can be recognized by a simple test. If you ask team members who have really anchored quality how much testing they do, they often can’t answer. For them, testing is no longer a separate work step, but part of what they do anyway.

The way to get there is through people, not methods. Richard came across this when he joined a project as a consultant and suggested methods. The reaction: “You’re not going to tell me anything.” This experience led to his involvement with coaching, needs, values and beliefs. A tester is not just someone who carries out test cases, but a person who wants to be picked up in their work.

Why good testers need to be communicative

Testing is a communicative activity, not a retreat job for the introverted nerd. Testers run through the project with a catalog of questions, need information and are inevitably annoying.

This is precisely what creates a position that many underestimate. Testers and test managers are often excellently networked, maintain an overview of the entire project and become the single point of truth. Colleagues come to them to find out how something works.

This role requires skills other than pure technology. The sociophobic nerd has a hard time here because the job requires them to go out and ask questions. On the other hand, the field is opening up for lateral entrants: people with an artistic or other academic background end up in testing and enrich the discipline.

The three pillars: basics, automation, attitude

Good testing rests on three pillars: solid test fundamentals, test automation and quality attitude within the team. None replaces the other.

The basics remain indispensable, especially with regard to AI. If you know an equivalence class method and what boundary values are, you can evaluate whether the test cases that an AI spits out are any good. Without this foundation, there is no benchmark.

The basics don’t just belong to the testers. Developers, product owners and UX designers should also know what is being tested at which test level, because quality should be supported by everyone. There is a lot of untapped potential here: teams do a foundation level and still do not apply what they have learned. There is a gap between knowledge and practice.

A certificate does not make anyone a good tester. But it does provide a foundation, common terms and methods. Only experience and the human connection make good testers. It is not an either-or, but complementary.

Test quality is people business

Testing creates one thing above all: trust. And trust is tied to people. No one trusts a machine to test properly.

It’s about creating trust. You want someone who is there as a human being and says: I’m writing this test report, I’m doing the tests, I can evaluate it, and then I’ll also sign my name. Richard Seidl

AI gives the tester more appreciation, not less. The evaluation of results, the communication, the responsibility with their own name: That remains human work. From a quality perspective, it’s not a good idea to remove the human element.

How the human factor is moving back to the forefront

People are currently regaining importance. Crises are hitting us in real time and putting a strain on many of us. But at the same time, there is a growing appreciation for the direct and personal, similar to after the pandemic, when meetings, conversations and a shared beer suddenly felt valuable again.

The same pendulum swing can be seen in projects. Despite increasing automation, the question of how the team is actually doing and how it can communicate better is coming to the fore again. Out of the bubble in which one’s own opinion is considered the only correct one, back into the discourse that allows for other opinions.

The concern about whether AI will replace testers is not a test-specific problem. It is the larger question of how we deal with technology. And in some places, organizations are realizing anew how important people really are.

Stress test strategies instead of managing documents

A test strategy gets better when you put it under pressure. The most effective approach in practice: challenge a team’s existing strategy in a workshop and find out where it is stuck and what is not working.

The result is tangible. After one day, the team has concrete levers at which it can really make a difference, in development or where things are stuck. This beats any full-time test management mandate that only manages.

There is also personal support. Accompanying a tester or test manager as a mentor over a period of time means finding out where they are personally struggling and where they are getting stuck. This work on people and the work on strategy are intertwined.

What Richard would advise his younger self to do

The most important piece of advice: dare to ask questions sooner. Actively asking questions in the project and in your own environment is a core skill in testing.

At the beginning of his career, Richard hid behind the test manager and had questions clarified through him instead of talking to people himself. Today, he would go in more proactively. If it’s unclear what something means, you ask instead of sitting it out.

He had to teach himself a lot of things as a self-taught tester, from programming to methods. At the beginning, he didn’t even realize that testing existed as a role. This is also a task for the discipline: to make it visible that this profession exists.

Why one podcast became two

The desire to disseminate knowledge to the community resulted in a weekly interview format instead of elaborate solo episodes. The idea matured from two video conversations, which were more fun than expected, and resulted in the first episode entitled “Quality as an attitude” in April 2023. Over 150 episodes have since been published.

The second podcast solved a feedback problem. English episodes in the German stream divided listeners: some wanted more international voices, others felt slowed down while driving because they couldn’t understand anything. The solution is a spin-off that bundles the English episodes on Thursdays, while the German podcast appears on Tuesdays.

The guests also differ depending on the language area. In German-speaking countries, a conversation usually revolves around a clear aspect such as BDD, DevOps or acceptance testing. Internationally, guests tend to want to share their wisdom, which is harder to pin down to one topic.

The consequences beyond pure testing are well received. Translating topics such as mental health, impostor syndrome or stoicism into the context of the industry brings a fresh perspective and positive feedback from the community.