James Bach and I have had too many conversations about testing to remember in our over 20 years of working together, but we finally found some time to sit down and record one. If you’ve got the time (to listen or watch), in the 2+ hours we reminisce and discuss Rapid Software Testing, the testing industry, AI, context-driven testing, ethics, and training horses! Below are links to some of the different people and stuff we mentioned…enjoy!

Satisfice Rapid Software Testing Never Forgive Them Michael Bolton James Christie Pradeep Soundararajan Association for Software Testing BCS SIGiST Venkatesh Rao Agile Manifesto Enshittification AI Manic Syndrome EU Liability for Defective Products UK and US Refuse to Sign International AI Declaration SIBOS GDPR Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Amish Tech Support Voltaire Paul Holland ISTQB Jerry Weinberg The Secrets of Consulting QR Podcast – Jerry Weinberg SNL Barber Skit Impact of GenAI on Critical Thinking

As Accenture joins the growing list of tech companies (Meta, Google, Amazon) ditching their #DEI programs, we can see clearly (as the numbers have told us for YEARS) the grift it was the whole time.

As the gutless fold under the slightest provocation, the curtains draw back from the show they were putting on and reveal they never really cared in the first place.

Frankly, those programs never moved the needle in a meaningful way and remind me of something I wrote 10 years ago when they started kicking them off:

“I’ve sat on multiple senior executive boards discussing the progression towards our targets in a room comprised entirely of middle aged, white men. Worse than that, two and three layers deep into the org charts the demographics looked exactly the same – and no amount of target setting is going to change that fact.”

The good thing is, whatever they do organizationally doesn’t affect what WE can do personally, and my commitment is to continue to endorse, sponsor, mentor, promote, and hire from as diverse a community as I can find.

Rant over, now back to work…

“To be in opposition is not to be a nihilist. And there is no decent or charted way of making a living at it. It is something you are, and not something you do.” – Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian, 2001

You’re not wrong, everything is getting worse…

Sigh…I’ve had my finger on the “publish” button for different versions of my initial thoughts on AI in testing for far too long, but this great post by Maaike Brinkhof finally pushed me to get it out there. This first one is context setting for a series I’m writing about AI, incorporating it into software testing, the dangers and opportunities, and what I see as a general failure of “duty of care” by our industry.

Love this on LinkedIn from Michael Bolton where he mentions my interview with Jerry Weinberg in response to the comment: Just because certain visible actions are a part of a process doesn’t mean that they ARE the process. Why is this misunderstanding so common?

His response is fantastic…

“Several years ago, on his Quality Remarks podcast, Keith Klain interviewed Jerry Weinberg. He asked Jerry why some people seemed eager to apply manufacturing models to software testing.

To your question, I’m going to give the reply that Jerry gave: “Because they’re not very smart.”

The people who keep making that mistake simply don’t understand the process. They haven’t even learned to observe and evaluate the visible parts of a process. They don’t consider the tacit knowledge or skills required to perform it.

The problem is compounded by the inability of many people performing the process to describe it accurately and articulately themselves. And THAT’s compounded by the fact that poor observers and evaluators often hire people who aren’t very good at performing or describing the work.

“And so we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.” —F. Scott Fitzgerald

The good news is that people can learn the skills required to comprehend processes, given motivation, time, study, training, practice, and support.”

Here’s the interview with Jerry…enjoy!

My reaction when I see the TMMi / ISO29119 / testing certification / #yourenotdoingmymodelright crowd doubling down into AI after decades of getting software testing wrong…

Very happy to announce I’ve been honored to contribute a chapter to Taking Testing Seriously: The Rapid Software Testing Way by James Bach of Satisfice and Michael Bolton of Developsense, co-creators of Rapid Software Testing (RST) . Over the course of my career hiring and managing 1000s of testers around the world, RST has been the most valuable training as well as providing a useful language for speaking to management about testing and risk. The chapter outlines a discussion where Michael and I explore my experiences running global teams, the role of testing in managing risk, and what I think it takes to make it as a test manager.

You can pre-order the book for the testers (or anyone) in your life on Amazon now – just in time for the holidays! Enjoy!

Taking Testing Seriously: The Rapid Software Testing Way

“Dive into the world of expert software testing with Taking Testing Seriously: The Rapid Software Testing Approach. This book arms software professionals with the knowledge required to master the Rapid Software Testing (RST) methodology. Written by two co-creators of the RST approach and supplemented by material from respected testers who offer valuable insights, it is an essential read for anyone seeking excellence in the craft of testing.“

Happy to be included in the 244th issue of Software Testing Weekly – thanks, Dawid Dylowicz!

Ahhhh, it’s that familiar time of year when the smell of Performance Reviews and Goal Setting is in the air! I’ve managed loads of testers over the years and get asked to write a lot of feedback for folks. You’ll hear on LinkedIn the popular advice to take ownership for your career and depend on others as little as possible.

Integrity doesn’t matter until it does, and frequently testers conflate compromising on what to do with the information found during testing with a compromise on the integrity of the testing. Over the years I’ve seen this cause a LOT of burnout in testers, as particularly on high profile, politically charged projects it can feel like disagreeing with the outcome of a business decision on risk, defect resolution, etc is a personal attack on your role as a tester.

To be clear – I would never compromise on the quality or integrity of the test approach, execution, or reporting on risk, results, or advice on what to do with that information. As my good friend Michael Bolton has said, lying to my clients is not a service I provide, and there are loads of people in this industry who are more than happy to give (and read) “happy path” reports on passing tests.

As we hurdle towards AI driven testing, more than ever we need professional testers with experience in navigating complex systems and communicating risk. It may seem that there are more than enough bad actors willing to tell companies what they want to hear about software testing, but I’m confident (and IME) eventually they’ll come around to the realisation of the real fight – maintaining integrity in our test approach.