Is Manual Testing Dying?
In this blog, we are going to discuss the future of manual testing, so many testers would have the question, what is the future of manual testing? Many discussions and, controversies happened on the same in the software testing communities.
So, let’s talk about a few things that give us clarity about these questions and solutions.
If you are working as a manual tester, then we can understand this kind of speculative query trigger panic. Mass adoption by organizations/companies doesn’t help the cause, and then it makes you feel like automation testing is going to play a big role over manual testing.
And sometimes above thoughts are valid if we see the progressive rates of automation testing however, along with this thing, we also need to understand the pros and cons of automation testing and how manual testing plays a vital role in the cons of automation testing.
So based on the above understanding, I have a few questions for you:
- Is it possible to create reliable 100% testing automatically with the help of tools?
- Is it wise for companies to phase out manual testing?
- Does automation testing is feasible for small organizations (ROI) or small projects?
- Can automation testing fully emulate human behavior?
The straightforward answer to all the above questions is No.
Let’s understand Manual Testing
Manual testing is the preliminary testing phase that’s closest to software development. It evaluates the website or application’s behavior through a step-by-step assessment based on the requirement specification analysis. The core objective of manual testing is to ensure that the product/project works as per the requirement specification documents and improve the quality of the application. Ex. Find as many defects before promoting into the market to avoid failures.
Why will manual testing always be needed?
Manual testing is a preferred choice in several scenarios. Let’s look at those scenarios where automation is not a good option and manual testers are better suited.
Feasibility of Automation Testing
100% automation is not feasible therefore, manual testing is required. If you want to create test data for the test execution, which again comes under manual testing. Automation testing cannot handle captcha, two-step verification, etc., yet, and many more reasons.
Delivering an automated testing system is resource intensive. The overhead of automated testing is much higher than manual testing. Therefore, manual testing is the only economically feasible option for smaller projects.
Automation is expensive
We know how automation testing is not feasible for smaller projects; however, for smaller organizations with budget constraints. Manual testing offers an alternative to escape automated test methods’ high expenses and maintenance costs.
Meticulous and extensive testing
The functionality and behavior of the system are evaluated using predefined and established processes in automated testing. Although the procedure is substantially speedier, the lack of any customization may cause minor flaws to go unnoticed. To eliminate any such problems, manual testing is necessary as an extra layer of protection.
Never can a machine completely mimic human behavior. Because of this, manual testers who can mimic these behaviors and evaluate the software in light of end users’ wants and demands are necessary for user experience testing. Higher UX will always require manual testing. Such a level of user experience testing is not doable with automation unless we invest in a highly trained AI solution.
What does the future hold?
Manual testing is becoming closer to software development because of modifications and operational advancements. The future looks bright for them as long as manual testers keep polishing their expertise and acquiring new technology.
QA questions are frequently asked of developers during interviews with businesses and start-ups. Within the industry, developers are increasingly expected to have some knowledge of manual testing. The line separating the developer and QA responsibilities is becoming hazier as agile becomes the norm, therefore, manual testers need to be familiar with development ideas like sorting algorithms. At the same time, functional and unit testing experience among developers is desirable.
Because it is difficult to produce software that is bug-free without human participation, manual testers will always be required. The paradigm of zero testers begins to fall short as teams grow, highlighting the reality that 100% automation of software testing is not feasible for sustainability.
Automation can augment manual testing
Some aspects of manual testing are augmented with automation to improve the efficiency of testing large applications. Foremost, any repetitive steps within the testing process that does not require manual expertise can be automated. It saves human resources, time, and energy. Aiding manual testers with artificial intelligence helps reduce human errors. Adding automation can help manual testers become more reliable. Another segment where automation can augment manual testing is when evaluating complex code. Manual testers may not be as effective and efficient in such scenarios as reliably scripted automated test cases.
Automation testing is just a way to make your work easier; it’s not a run away from manual testing.
“Automation does not do what testers used to do unless one ignores most things a tester really does. Automated testing is useful for extending the reach of the tester’s work, not to replace it.”
The precision, intuitiveness, and fine-grained control required for software testing are all provided by manual testing. The claim that manual testing has no future is untrue. There are advantages to both human and automated testing. Without a doubt, manual testing will never be fully replaced. Thus, QA testers must mix manual and automated testing for the best possible ROI. However, this doesn’t mean that manual testers should not work on automation testing, they should focus on the tool and technologies running into the market and try to adapt those because those tools are going to reduce their repetitive tasks, and this will help the organization in terms of resources, time, efforts, etc.!
That’s all in this blog; please let me know if you have any queries or feedback in the comment section.