There are no magic recipes or one-size-fits-all solutions to solve a problem. This maxim is especially true when we talk about software development and, in particular, its testing phase, whether extremely simple or complex, to guarantee the product’s maximum quality.
At one end, you can recruit an army of experts who can carry out the process, knowing perfectly well what to look for and how to solve the problem. This modality, known as manual QA, may sometimes be more demanding, but it may be just what is needed.
On the other end, we have QA automation, which is essential to speed up testing times and provide greater coverage. However, contrary to what many people have written off as a fantasy, this is not magic or a process that solves all problems by simply clicking one button (as simply as sending a document to print, for example). Defining which parts of the tests can be automated and which aspects are best managed manually is essential.
The best of both worlds
Why choose one or the other strategy if you can have the best of both worlds? At Making Sense, we understand that each project has its features. So, we work with manual QA and QA automation with one primary objective in mind: to add value to the final solution.
Therefore, we design a testing plan with a well-defined scope. This applies to the team of people who will work on solving the problem and the details of what the automation testing software should receive to know what to look for and repair. We also work on the selection of the tools, the definition of the work environment, the supervision of the deliverables, and the risk avoidance map.
Also, internally we have several training programs for manual testing specialists to leap to the world of automation, thus making human resources available in both fields. With this, more accurate, comprehensive, and reliable tests are achieved, significantly increasing software quality.