Elisabeth Hendrickson - StickyMinds · The Whole Team is Responsible for Process Change Planning Documentation Handoffs Automation Process How Not To Improve The Process: …furthermore,

BIO PRESENTATION

BETTER SOFTWARE CONFERENCE & EXPO 2005 September 22, 2005

Hyatt Regency San Francisco Airport San Francisco, California, USA

W15

September 21, 2005 3:00 PM

AGILE QA - AN OXYMORON?

Elisabeth Hendrickson Quality Tree Software, Inc.

Elisabeth Hendrickson Elisabeth Hendrickson is an independent consultant who specializes in software testing, quality assurance, and management. With more than twelve years of experience working with leading software companies, she is the founder of Quality Tree Software, Inc. An award-winning author, Elisabeth has published more than twenty articles and is a frequently invited speaker at major software conferences.

Copyright (c) 2004 - 2005, Quality Tree Software, Inc. 1

Agile QA—An Oxymoron?

Elisabeth HendricksonQuality Tree Software, Inc.

www.qualitytree.com


What Does “Agile” Mean?

Agile is more than a buzzword. It is a relentless focus on providing a continuous stream of business value, even in the face of constant change.– See the Agile Manifesto:

http://www.agilemanifesto.org– And the Agile Alliance:

http://www.agilealliance.org– And the Declaration of Interdependence

http://www.pmdoi.org/– And the Agile Project Leadership Network

http://www.apln.org

Agility is usually achieved by adopting one or more Agile methodologies.


Examples of Agile Methodologies

LeanLean manufacturing concepts applied to software development.

ScrumLightweight management framework.

CrystalLightweight set of development practices.

Extreme Programming (XP)

Rigorous set of practices designed to keep both the code and team agile.


Agile Synthesized

• Communication and collaboration

• Visible indicators• Disciplined development

practices

• Feedback• Whole team thinking• Short iterations• Low overhead, high

productivity


Calling It “Agile” Doesn’t Make It So

This is NOT Agile:

1. Compress the schedule2. Toss out the

documentation3. Code up to the last minute

The organization may gain short term speed but at the cost of long term pain.


How Traditional QA Practices Evolved

Analyze Design Code Test/Bug Fix

With great optimism and the best of intentions, The Project Plan is announced:

ReleaseRequirements handed off to Dev

Completed Code handed off to QA


How Traditional QA Practices Evolved

Analyze, Design, & Code Test/Bug Fix

Inevitably, The Project Plan is revised:

ReleaseCompleted Code handed off to Test


The Result: Practices Intended to Control ChaosTraditional QA practices attempt to manage the chaos (or at least avoid the blame):• “Last Defender of Quality” stance• Strict change management • Detailed preparation and up front planning• Heavyweight documentation suitable for outsourcing

the test effort• Strict entrance and exit criteria with signoffs• Heavyweight test automation focused on regression• Attempts at process enforcement

These practices are anti-Agile. Can QA adapt in an Agile environment?


Becoming Agile: Shifting Roles

“Fear not! I’ll protect

you!”

“Hey, would this help?

from last line of defense… …to team support


Necessary Conditions for Agile QA

1. The organization is willing to embrace agility as defined by the Agile Manifesto.Saying “Be More Agile” or “Go Faster” isn’t enough.

2. The whole team is responsible for quality, not just the testers or people with “Quality” in their title.Which are you more likely to hear: “How did you miss that bug?!?” or “How did we not catch that?”

3. Everyone tests, not just designated testers.Agile teams are “test infected.”

4. Managers focus on fixing problems, not blame.Agile practices don’t provide CYA paper trails and are unlikely to succeed in a high-blame, high-fear environment.


Becoming Agile: Two Key Principles

Increase the rate of feedback

Reduce waste


Traditional & Agile QA Contrasted

Get down from the pulpit and work with the team.

Create it, enforce it, bring out the Quality Stick if necessary.

Process

All levels, built by anyone, an integral part of the project.

System-level, built by tool specialists, created after the code is “done.”

Automation

It’s not a relay race. Collaborate.

Formal entrance and exit criteria with signoffs.

Handoffs

Only as much as absolutely necessary.

Verbose.Documentation

Plan as you go.Comprehensive up front design, including test design.

Planning

Accept it. Plan for it. Embrace it.

Manage & control it.Change

Agile QATraditional QA


Embrace Change: Plan for Maintainability

When creating test artifacts…

• Minimize duplication.Thought exercise: if a feature were removed from your software, how many artifacts would have to be updated?

• Use tools designed for change.Hint: if the vendor says “stabilize the interface first,” run away!

Chan

gePl

annin

gDo

cume

ntatio

nHa

ndoff

sAu

tomati

onPr

oces

s


Plan Ahead…But Not Too Far Ahead

A little planning is good. More is not better.• Plan for the current iteration.

Design tests for the features or stories to be done in the near term. Speculative planning means rework.

• Have a strategy that fits on one page.If it is still relevant in 6 months, it’s probably at the right level of detail.

• Keep an up-to-date, prioritized risks list.What kind of information are the testers looking for? The risks list covers it.

Chan

gePl

anni

ngDo

cume

ntatio

nHa

ndoff

sAu

tomati

onPr

oces

s


Favor Informal, Collaborative Tools

Databases

Gantt/PERT Charts

Comprehensive, Polished Documents Created from a Standard Template

Formal

Whiteboards

Sticky Notes

Index Cards

Wikis

InformalChan

gePl

anni

ngDo

cume

ntatio

nHa

ndoff

sAu

tomati

onPr

oces

s


Monitor Documentation Costs

How Much Does Documentation Cost?Informal polling of 162 software testers from 65 companies revealed that most spend more than 33% of their time documenting tests.

How Much Time Are We Spending on Test Documentation?

0510152025303540

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

% Time

# Te

ster

s R

epor

ting

Chan

gePl

annin

gDo

cum

enta

tion

Hand

offs

Autom

ation

Proc

ess


Keep the Documentation Simple

• Capture the essence, not the details.Step-by-step instructions cost time without providing value (usually).

• Point to other project documents.If it’s in the user guide, requirements, specs, etc., leave it there.

• Centralize generic tests in a checklist.Try this: count the number of times common condition, like invalid dates or null strings, are documented in the test docs. More than once is too many.

Chan

gePl

annin

gDo

cum

enta

tion

Hand

offs

Autom

ation

Proc

ess


Watch Verbose Wording

Which would you rather maintain?Choose the Import option from the File menu. A dialog titled “Import File” appears. Navigate to \\x\y\z\long.dat and click Open. A dialog titled “Importing…” appears with the current status, a progress bar, and a button labeled “Cancel.” Click on the Cancel button. Choose OK on the confirmation dialog. Verify that the import stops.

Or:Start a long import. Cancel it in the middle. Verify it stops.

Chan

gePl

annin

gDo

cum

enta

tion

Hand

offs

Autom

ation

Proc

ess


A Lightweight Example: WikisCh

ange

Plan

ning

Docu

men

tatio

nHa

ndoff

sAu

tomati

onPr

oces

s

Built in Twiki with the Table plugin installed. See http://www.twiki.org


Another Lightweight Example: Mind MapsCh

ange

Plan

ning

Docu

men

tatio

nHa

ndoff

sAu

tomati

onPr

oces

s

Built in MindManager. See http://www.mindjet.com


Reduce Handoffs: Integrate Test Efforts

Testing is not a phase. It’s a way of life.• Agile teams are test infected.

The question, “How will we test it?” is as important as “How will we build it?”

• Co-locate testers and programmers.But sitting side by side does not ensure communication.

• Track testing status and programming status all together.Show tests run-passed-failed together with features/stories done and left to do.

Chan

gePl

annin

gDo

cume

ntatio

nHa

ndof

fsAu

tomati

onPr

oces

s


Instruments of Agreement, not Instruments of Blame Ch

ange

Plan

ning

Docu

menta

tion

Hand

offs

Autom

ation

Proc

ess

• Hold end of iteration exploratory testing sessions to ensure shared understanding.

• Do a team victory dance whenever a feature/story is officially accepted.

Do away with the sign off sheet.

“OK , now everyone sign in blood.”

Instead, ritualize acceptance as a shared team activity.


Leverage Automation Investments

Automate everything you can, but invest wisely.• Collaborate with programmers on test

infrastructure code.The programmers have already automated the unit tests. Why not reuse the investment where possible?

• Use different types of automated tests for different purposes.Automated system tests should cover end-to-end sequences. Unit tests detect unintended change. Don’t substitute one for the other.

Chan

gePl

annin

gDo

cume

ntatio

nHa

ndoff

sAu

tom

atio

nPr

oces

s


Automation & Exploratory Testing

Use test automation to support earlyexploratory testing.

Traditional test wisdom says we can’t start testing a feature until it’s accessible from an external interface (like a GUI). But we don’t have to wait. Test automation can facilitate manual exploration.

Chan

gePl

annin

gDo

cume

ntatio

nHa

ndoff

sAu

tom

atio

nPr

oces

s


The Whole Team is Responsible for ProcessCh

ange

Plan

ning

Docu

menta

tion

Hand

offs

Autom

ation

Proc

ess

How Not To Improve The Process:

…furthermore, henceforth you shall

submit your unit tests for my review…

Don’t lecture or blame.Don’t rattle the Quality Process drums.

Instead, let the team take responsibility for process.And be a member of the team.


Agile Testers Wanted: A Job Description

Responsibilities:• Perform manual/exploratory tests on early-stage code• Create automated acceptance tests• Advise the team about overall risks and trends• Help the business stakeholders define acceptance criteria• Facilitate communication between the technical & business

stakeholdersQualifications:• Experience designing and executing tests• Scripting skills in at least one of the following languages:

Ruby, Perl, Python, or JavaScript. Experience programming in Java, C#, etc. a plus.

• Strong analysis skills• Ability to work in a team (bullpen) environment


QA Teams that Embrace Agility…

• Focus on providing value to our key stakeholders (both business-facing and technology-facing)

• Shift from being the last line of defense to providing an information service.

• Aggressively reduce time and resources spent on anything that does not directly contribute to providing information that helps move the project forward.

• Collaborate with programmers to improve testability and leverage test automation efforts.


Further Reading…

Beck, K. (1999). Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison-Wesley.

Cockburn, A. (2004). Crystal Clear: A Human-Powered Methodology for Small Teams. Addison-Wesley.

Crispin, L., & House, T. (2002). Testing Extreme Programming. Addison-Wesley.

Poppendieck, M. & Poppendieck, T. (2003). Lean Software Development. Addison-Wesley.

Schwaber, K. & Beedle, M. (2001). Agile Software Development with SCRUM. Prentice Hall.


Acknowledgements

Many thanks to early reviewers of the ideas presented here: Brian Marick, William Wake, Jonathan Kohl, Jeffrey Fredrick, Daniel Knierim, Marc Kellogg, Danny Faught, Ron Jeffries, Hubert Smits, Rob Mee, Sherry Erskine, Amy Jo Esser, Gunjan Doshi, Dave Liebreich, Janet Gregory, Chris McMahon