- "Instead of figuring out what works, they are stuck investigating what doesn’t work.”
Why did you use "stuck" referring to context of the other testers? Isn't "investigating what doesn’t work" more important than "figuring out what works" (other factors being equal)?
I love that question. It really made me think. Here is my answer:
- If stuff doesn’t work, then investigating why it doesn’t work may be more important than figuring out what works.
- If we’re not aware of anything that is broken, then figuring out what else works (or what else is not broken) is more important than investigating why something doesn’t work…because there is nothing broken to investigate.
When testers spend their time investigating things that don’t work, rather than figuring out what does work, it is less desirable than the opposite. Less desirable because it means we’ve got stuff that doesn’t work! Less desirable to who? It is less desirable for the development team. It means there are problems in the way we are developing software.
An ultimate goal would be bug free software, right? If skilled testers are not finding any bugs, and they are able to tell the team how the software appears to work, that is a good thing for the development team. However, it may be a bad thing for the tester.
- Many testers feel like failures if they don’t have any issues to investigate.
- Many testers are not sure what to do if they don’t have any issues to investigate.
- If everything works, many testers get bored.
- If everything works, there are fewer hero opportunities for many testers.
I don’t believe things need to be that way. I‘m interested in exploring ways to have hero moments by delivering good news to the team. It sounds so natural but it isn’t. As a tester, it is soooooo much more interesting to tell the team that stuff just doesn’t work. Now that’s dysfunctional. Or is it?
And that is the initial thought that sparked my Avoid Trivial Bugs, Report What Works post.
Thanks, Ilya, for making me think.