Why Automation – Is it worth?

Posted: May 27th, 2014 | Author: | 1 Comment »

Automation Testing

Automated testing is need of the hour. Possibilities of the automation, apart from custom manual testing, are being analyzed for every other application now-a-days. It is preferred to manual testing due to several factors such as improved accuracy of tests, wider test coverage, more reliable results and above all, it saves time and cost rapidly.

Testing manually, on the other hand, is time consuming and error prone, hence can result in defects being left out. Having said that, I would like to analyze the positives of automated testing over manual as is generally said. Basically, it’s not always advisable to automate the AUT (Application under test) as opposed to prevalent myth about automation.

Automation can be accurate in giving reliable results with wider test coverage while saving time and cost, but this may not always be the case with all AUTs. Imagine the AUT with ever-evolving requirements and dynamic webpages. Here, Automation may be accurate with wider test coverage but will consume much more time and cost giving unreliable results due to system instability. In case of UI based AUT, if design changes frequently the automation is strictly discouraged. Further, choosing an inappropriate tool can lead to reduced efficiency as tool selection largely depends upon the technology used in the AUT.

It can be said that automation is the best way to increase the effectiveness, efficiency and test coverage of testing but only when proper analysis of AUT is made before shifting to it, else certainly a bad idea if its objective is not clear. Also, deciding on what to automate is most vital task before planning any automation process to follow. It is not possible to automate everything ; nevertheless modules that are stable and are manually tested at least once should be taken for automation. Test Cases that are executed repeatedly and consume time could be a priority, making the automation best suited for regression testing or retesting of the fixed issues. Descriptive test cases that are clearly explained are automatable and not the vague ones. Apart from regression, it can test stress, load and performance of the AUT.

Hence, Automation should be taken up only after analyzing the AUT and determining if the automation will actually be time and cost effective or otherwise.

Posted in Software Engineering, Software Quality | Tagged , , , ,
  • Chinmoy Panda

    Nice, balanced article.

    In most cases a hybrid approach is suitable and works best, with more manual testing during early part of life-cycle and more automated testing toward latter. This means you build creative test-cases during evolution stage, and are able to do effortless regression of the same test-cases during maintenance stage.

    Ironically, in most cases headstrong decision-makers do just the opposite depending on which camp they sit in – “oh automation never works” or “oh manual testing is a waste of time”.

iso 9001 QA25 Nasscom Red Herring zinnov STPI iso 27001

copyright (c) Mindfire Solutions 2007-2013. Login