First - thank you to all the new subscribers. I have a longer post I'll share in a few days, but since a lot of you don't know me I want to give some context on the last post before I move on.
Nearly nine years ago, Brent Jensen and I began the AB Testing Podcast because we saw changes happening with the way teams build and delivered software, and how testing was changing. We talk about many other things on the podcast (one could say we talk about too many things), but that primary theme has remained. We’re not inventing anything, and we’re not telling anyone what to do - our goal is to help teams (especially - but not limited to testers) handle this change and grow. Change is hard, and people generally avoid it. We’ve seen a lot of teams attempt to change and fail miserably. We have also seen teams that have learned how to tighten feedback loops, improve quality, and accelerate their businesses.
The words in my last post aren’t a prescription. They are describing something I’ve seen work first-hand across hundreds of teams. When I wrote it, I knew it would cause the reactions it did. To be absolutely clear, I didn’t write it to create controversy - I wrote it to start a discussion. A discussion on something that is already happening across more and more software teams.
…a lot of people nod their head and say, “yeah, that makes sense.” Conversely, some people think it’s the stupidest thing they’ve ever heard.
As expected, the comments on linkedin about this article fall into both camps. As critical thinkers, I’d like to ask you this: What could cause people on both sides of this discussion see different outcomes? Nobody (including me) is saying that we should “fire the testers”, or that “testers need to become developers” or to make any change at all without understanding the benefit. Change - whether it’s continuous improvement, or unseen deterioration takes time and a reason.
I’m a big believer in respectful debate as a method of learning, so believe it or not, the “heat” has been fun reading. I believe in every word in that post - not as what it should be today, but as it could be someday, but the misunderstandings and confusion point to details that I will need to expand on in future posts.
As I mentioned in my first substack post, I’m writing again after a long break, and it feels good. Thanks for taking the time to read and comment - and please continue to share.
Hi Alan
I really enjoy and get lots to meditate on from reading your posts. One of my favorite pastimes is to listen to AB Testing while doing my regular walks (which causes some staring when I suddenly burst into laughter for no apparent reason- double the fun!).
I remember when as a tester I kind of started to understand what testing is and watched "Test is Dead" for the first time. It made me feel uncomfortable. And created a sense of uncertainty as to what I should be doing next.
Luckily, I didn't go full panic mode but instead read a lot. And that helped me to discover that I didn't actually now what (or why) useful and meaningful testing was. In other words, the more I learned the more I understood how little I know. And it was a good feeling. Then I went back and rewatched "Test is Dead" and I saw it in a completely different light. Which was weird, in a good way.
Now, if I where to make sense of what had happened to me, then it would be this: I was on a path, a concrete and specific path (a role). And now I was being told that it's actually a dead end. But, suddenly (I really can't explain it) I realized that what I've got is actually a map (striving for better quality) and in order to make sense if it I had to change. And change is what was scary and created that uncertainty. The kicker, though, was the nuance that it wasn't my "role" that needed to change but "I" needed to change.
Sorry for the long comment, just wanted to share my experience.
Keep up the good weaseling!
German