Collaborating in a strategy-oriented session with the squad is always an enriching opportunity for learning.
For this exercise, we designed a distinctive methodology. We split the team into two units and chose to cross-examine each other about a general item – Mobile Phone. The only prerequisite was that the inquiries must relate solely to phone assessment.
Recommended IPTV Service Providers
- IPTVGREAT – Rating 4.8/5 ( 600+ Reviews )
- IPTVRESALE – Rating 5/5 ( 200+ Reviews )
- IPTVGANG – Rating 4.7/5 ( 1200+ Reviews )
- IPTVUNLOCK – Rating 5/5 ( 65 Reviews )
- IPTVFOLLOW -Rating 5/5 ( 48 Reviews )
- IPTVTOPS – Rating 5/5 ( 43 Reviews )
As a result, the session culminated with a range of intriguing unresolved questions and an assortment of superior strategies for phone assessing.
The valuable lesson learned from this meeting was that questioning (regardless of how nonsensical it may seem) is helpful in refining products/software, which is, after all, the ultimate endgame.
I plan to confirm this concept in the subsequent article.
Learning Outcomes:
Significance and Importance of Testers’ Inquiries
Being testers, we understand the realities of the working world, particularly relating to delivery time and constraints.
Even without the presence of stress, it might not be feasible for every tester to possess a thorough and concise requirements document. In either case, testers are inclined to presume due to the scarcity of data and the imperative need for decisions.
Suggested reading: => Coping with Complicated Requirements as a Tester
Examples of Speculations
The requirement document specified that the article writing application should exhibit the writer’s name. However, during testing, it became apparent that many authors could create the same essay and keep their versions intact.
Now, in this scenario, how should the author’s name be displayed? The requirement was ambiguous, and there was no time nor resources available for clarification. In this case, the developer speculated that the writer’s name related to the latest version of the essay should be shown, and the tester concurred.
Inquiries stemming from speculations might comprise of:
- What if multiple authors updated the essay simultaneously?
- What if several authors have the same name?
- What if a writer wants to access the most recent version they contributed?
An application crashed when a user endeavored to refresh the identical page for the 7th time. In a situation with heavy delivery pressure, it is vital to have the necessary data to comprehend the risks involved with this particular problem.
In the aforementioned scenario, if there’s no data, a tester may have to speculate that it is an unusual occurrence and can be tackled later.
Probable inquiries resulting from this speculation could be:
- Is it sensible to take the risk given the severity of the observed issue?
- Is there a makeshift solution that can be applied?
- Should this be incorporated in the frequently encountered problems list?
From the illustrations given, it’s critical to observe that the speculations testers make and the questions they pose aren’t always specific to the product. On occasion, the inquiries may relate to “what’s next, how, and why”.
Deciding What, How, or Why is the Subsequent Action
Step 1: Execute an Investigation
When confronted with unanticipated behavior, an investigative tester embarks on an inspection that invariably prompts the creation of inquiries.
For instance:
When an issue was noticed where the user was constantly logging out every 5 seconds, an examination disclosed an automated query functioning in the database every 5 seconds, which erased all ongoing sessions.
Possible inquiries emanating from this examination could include:
- What was the need for that query?
- What was the intention behind automating it every 5 seconds?
Hence, performing an examination produces additional inquiries that assist in reaching the right answers.
Step 2: Utilize Previous Encounters
Drawing from past encounters of similar issues our minds swiftly extract applicable data. When utilized against the current situation, this data produces further inquiries.
For example:
From previous encounters working with Linux OS, I know that restarting the server frequently rectifies many errors inherently. Employing this knowledge in the current scenario where the code was launched and maintained on a Linux server, I observed a progress in the product’s performance.
The queries that followed were:
- What defunct processes were slowing down the code’s speed?
- What could have been the outcome of not rebooting the server?
- Are we missing any factors while gauging the product’s performance?
Step 3: Evaluate Information
An expert tester perpetually scrutinizes data and probes into the presence of patterns.
For example:
Post the initial product launch, only 3 system crashes were reported while the product delivered perfectly in all other situations. With the launch of the second version, the reported failures escalated to 17. The reported failures increased to 47 by the third version launch even with no significant changes. Why did this transpire?
While scrutinizing the data, it was evident that during the first launch, there were only 3 failure cases, all from rural centers.
For the second launch, the number of rural centers increased, which led to a higher failure rate. A more detailed inspection unveiled that it was not a problem with a specific product feature but rather due to subpar network speed. Hence, examining the available data can help identify patterns in the problem.
Possible inquiries resulting from this examination could be:
- What is the influence of network speed on the system?
- What corrective actions can be taken?
- What preemptive measures should be adopted in the future?
- What network speeds should be considered during the testing process?
Note: There are definitely numerous other inquiries one might have. We’ve simply shared a shortlist to supply a rudimentary notion.
Hence, testers don’t pose inquiries merely for the sake of it. They have various reasons to do so, including:
- Perpetual inspection
- Absence of specific knowledge
- Doubt clarification
- Resolution of assumed speculations
- Assessment of overall risk
- Assisting in decision making
As they say, the act of posing questions is an art.
So the next obvious inquiry is: How do we properly formulate an inquiry?
Articulating an Inquiry
Asking inquiries is always promoted in our profession. However, if you receive negative or nonchalant responses to your questions, perhaps you need to tweak your question-asking technique or refine your skills in posing inquiries.
While I personally champion the need for posing inquiries, I expect individuals to conduct some preliminary studies first. Nobody appreciates being asked “where can I download Skype” when Google is at your disposal :).
Therefore, while positing inquiries, it is advisable to incorporate the following strategies to boost the chances of obtaining meaningful responses.
Formulate Thought-provoking inquiries:
- Dive deeper into the complexity of the inquiry, as answers might not always be self-explanatory
- Remain prepared to actively pay attention and refrain from disruption
- Avoid making assumptions and request relevant data, like useful links or suggested literature
- Share your point of view and ask about theirs
As they say, drafting a question is a gateway to a universe filled with insight. Notice how kids tend to ask more inquiries than grownups. Why? – Because they’re not yet accustomed to dependency on speculations. Imitate the behavior of kids while seeking information.
Continue asking, stay inquisitive, always clarify, and testing will turn simpler, more efficient, and exciting.
Author’s Details: This compelling article was drafted by Bhumik M., who’s part of the STH team.
If this article has sparked your curiosity and you have more questions, please don’t hesitate to write them in the comments section below. 🙂