It appears like automation is the norm however, when it comes to testing management it is not necessary for everything to be subjected to this method. In some situations, it might be beneficial to go back to manual testing to evaluate certain aspects of a plan. The main issue is for the organizations to know what method is best suited to the particular situation.
Software testing is a process that is being performed during the process of software development. It involves testing, verifying, and validating the specifications of the software. We’re dedicated to providing high-quality products to our customers, and that is why we verify the product’s functionality prior to its release.
Initially, tests were conducted manually, but in this world, everyone is looking for an easy life and so why should testers not be too? This is why Automation testing entered the scene and the situation dramatically changed.
Also Read: Accessibility Testing Proposals
Here are a few examples where quality assurance teams must employ manual testing rather than automated testing:
When flexibility is required
Although manual testing isn’t always as precise as automated processes, manual procedures permit testers to have more freedom in their operation. Since automated testing is beneficial for repeat cases and situations, it is likely that the same scripts and codes are used every time. If testers have an idea they wish to get started on immediately but doing it by automating the process requires creating tests and programming them using the automation software, and performing the test. This is a lengthy process. In this scenario, it is much easier and faster to run the test using manual processes.
While testing usability
The success or failure of an app is mostly dependent on its functionality. This goes beyond simply conducting automated tests to make sure that there aren’t any flaws. Computers are not able to have any original thoughts - they execute actions that are programmed, and do not provide the same feedback that a human will provide when using an application. For instance, automated tests can identify code mistakes however, they are unable to predict how users would react to a particular feature or how well users can navigate through the app.
If users discover that the tool within the application isn’t functioning in the way they want it to, it could be an important factor in determining whether other users will adopt the program. This is exactly the kind of information tests conducted manually would yield. It is found that usability and exploratory testing require both human and machine interference. This can help to quickly identify and eliminate any issues that arise when users interact with the application in specific ways.
Automated testing offers many advantages in testing, however manual testing may be more effective in certain situations. If they can determine which approach is appropriate for the particular situation, QA teams can streamline processes, improve productivity, and increase overall quality.
If short-term projects are in operation
Automation demands a lot of planning and investment and can be a problem in projects that are short-term. When speaking, John Overbaugh, the senior SDET leader at Microsoft explained that automated testing isn’t logical for this particular scenario because of the cost. Automating the initial costs of the process could be excessive for the expected return on investment and value provided by the final product. In this case, manual testing is less expensive and beneficial overall for the bottom line.
Also Read: Is Accessibility Only For People With Blindness?
Conclusion
Testing is a broad field as well. Manual Testing is still as vital as Automation. There are many kinds of testing that the automation tool won’t be able to assist us with, and we must choose manual Testing. The scripts for tools are created in a manual manner. The tool is developed by hand, and tools don’t require the intervention of a human, however, it needs instruction provided by a person.
Every machine and software can only do what it was asked to perform and that is its only limitation (or sometimes, the advantage since it is not able to act more intelligent than us). Automated tools also have limitations, but eventually, they will improve and be more intelligent.
Both manual and automated testing are both beneficial and disadvantageous. The decision to choose between the two is based on the needs of the project as well as time and budget. In the end, we can say that when we need experienced testers, we should go for manual testing. However, if there is a need to automate the test and test, we should go for Automation.
Share this blog on:
