Use Case Risks in Test Automation

People who know me and my work probably know my emphasis on good test design for successful test automation. I have written about this in “Key Success Factors for Keyword Driven Testing“. In the Action Based Testing (ABT) method that I have pioneered over the years it is an essential element for success. However, agreeing with me in workshops and actually applying the principles in projects turns out quite often to be two different things. Apart from my own possible limitations as a teacher, I see at least one more reason: The way the testing is involved in the development projects.

A typical development project will start with a global understanding of what the system needs to do, which is then detailed out further, for example into use cases. These use cases have proven to be helpful in implementation and various testing efforts, but I’m getting more and more the impression that they may also pose a risk for good test design when they are the only source of information for the test team. There are two reasons:

1. They tend to have a high level of detail
2. They usually follow the end-user perspective

Re 1: The level of detail of use cases is primarily aimed at the developers, and the information they need to know. More often than not it is implicitly assumed that this is also a good level for information for testers to develop test cases from (for the sake of simplicity I will not discuss the usefulness of techniques like exploratory testing, I will just assume that test cases are made and their execution is automated).

Re 2: In many tests it matters how a system handles transactions, and provides the correct and complete follow up actions and information. The end-user interacting with the UI is then not always relevant, and I would not like to see it explicitly specified as part of test cases (in ABT the UI specifics would be hidden in the ‘actions’). However, having the UI oriented use cases as the primary source of information makes it hard to focus on the transaction handling and other aspects of the system.

My message would be this: don’t start creating test cases from use cases, or similar developer oriented sources of information, before you have had a chance to create a high level test design, in which you specify which test products you’re going to create and what level of detail they would need to have.

Article by Hans Buwalda, CTO, LogiGear Corporation

 

Hans Buwalda

Hans leads LogiGear’s research and development of test automation solutions, and the delivery of advanced test automation consulting and engineering services. He is a pioneer of the keyword approach for software testing organizations, and he assists clients in strategic implementation of the Action Based Testing™ method throughout their testing organizations.

Hans is also the original architect of LogiGear’s TestArchitect™, the modular keyword-driven toolset for software test design, automation and management. Hans is an internationally recognized expert on test automation, test development and testing technology management. He is coauthor of Integrated Test Design and Automation (Addison Wesley, 2001), and speaks frequently at international testing conferences.

Hans holds a Master of Science in Computer Science from Free University, Amsterdam.

Hans Buwalda
Hans Buwalda, CTO of LogiGear, is a pioneer of the Action Based and Soap Opera methodologies of testing and automation, and lead developer of TestArchitect, LogiGear’s keyword-based toolset for software test design, automation and management. He is co-author of Integrated Test Design and Automation, and a frequent speaker at test conferences.

The Related Post

Regardless of your current state of tools, building an effective Continuous Integration suite of significant automated regression tests is the key to moving to a higher level of confidence in today’s development world. In the evolution timeline of software development tools, new tools have recently proliferated. We have all been sold on collaboration, transparency and ...
“Happy About Global Software Test Automation: A Discussion of Software Testing for Executives” Author: Hung Q. Nguyen, Michael Hackett, and Brent K. Whitlock Publisher: Happy About (August 1, 2006) Finally, a testing book for executives!, November 17, 2006 By Scott Barber “Chief Technologist, PerfTestPlus” Happy About Global Software Test Automation: A Discussion of Software Testing ...
A short-list of selection criteria and popular automation tools. There are a lot of test automation tools available in the market, from heavy-duty enterprise level tools to quick and dirty playback-and-record tools for browser testing. For anyone just starting their research we’ve put together a short list of requirements and tools to consider.
Cross-Browser Testing is an integral part of the Software Testing world today. When we need to test the functionality of a website or web application, we need to do so on multiple browsers for a multitude of reasons.
When automated tests are well-organized and written with the necessary detail, they can be very efficient and maintainable. But designing automated tests that deal with data can be challenging if you have a lot of data combinations. For example, let’s say we want to simulate a series of 20 customers, along with the number of ...
The growing complexity of the Human-Machine Interface (HMI) in cars offers traditional testers an opportunity to capitalize on their strengths. The human-machine interface (HMI) is nothing new. Any user interface including a graphical user interface (GUI) falls under the category of human-machine interface. HMI is more commonly being used to mean a view into the ...
5 roadblocks in vehicular autonomy that complicate Software Testing Experts in the field have previously referred to air travel as somewhat of a gold standard for autonomous vehicle safety, but after Boeing’s two tragedies, that analogy can no longer be used when talking about self-driving cars. This was after Boeing’s 737 MAX Jets have found ...
How to do UI test automation with the fewest headaches I’m currently interviewing lots of teams that have implemented acceptance testing for my new book. A majority of those interviewed so far have at some point shot themselves in the foot with UI test automation. After speaking to several people who are about to do ...
I’ve been teaching a lot lately, was in India for one week, and I’m off to Seattle in two weeks to teach on performance topics. I thoroughly enjoy teaching, it allows me to stay sharp with current trends, and provides a nice break from the “implementation focus” that I generally have day to day.
*You can check the answer key here
Based in Alberta, Canada, Jonathan Kohl takes time out of his busy schedule to discuss his views on software testing and automation.
The challenges with any automation effort is to know your capability. I’ve seen too many automation efforts begin and end with a tool decision. Generally these tools are very complex pieces of software that do many more things then we would ever use in our normal everyday testing. It even adds more misery to the ...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Stay in the loop with the lastest
software testing news

Subscribe