5 Reasons You Must Know About Before Building Your Testing Automation Project

5 Reasons You Must Know About Before Building Your Testing Automation Project

In theory, Test Automation programs or tools are supposed to make things easier for testers, spare time and provide us with an additional relaxation blanket for our evaluation coverage.

And so many organizations fail to implement a scalable, strong and good Test Automation infrastructure that return the resources that are invested and could save them. Some "Throw away" written Test-automation jobs and others sustained in an on-going struggle with their goals to earn a stable Automation suite.

Over the years I have observed many companies trying to execute their automation efforts, I have observed written projects thrown away, frameworks switched and managers being fired because they failed to provide what has been promised or set as a target.

There are lots of reasons for failure, although automation makes perfect sense in the long term, we do need to understand that it is far more hard as it seems.

Below are a few of the reasons you must know about before you jump ahead and start building your testing automation project:

Analyze & Ask Questions: A Test Automation job is a job like any other applications project and ought to be treated just like one; How would you process planning a software project? Let this idea direct you when you think about implementing your Test Automation project. Who would you pick for the job? Whom will use the produced product? Which language or framework is the most suitable for the job? Would you understand from challenges and their guidelines and have a peek? Would you compose an architecture you know nothing about on your own, or would you call an advisor to advise you with a few thoughts?

All of these questions are simply the tip of this iceberg of what you ought to be asking yourself before you write one line of code or even test situation.

Inadequate Skillset: Let me ask you a question. Would you allow worse or a non-experienced programmer, someone who does not understand how to compose a great clean searchable code - style the design of your app and write it from scratch? I think that the answer is no. So why do so many companies think that quality could be implemented by someone Evaluation Automation infrastructure without the experience and skill set? If the dedicated staff does not have experience and the knowledge and you do not plan to hire somebody who does, then you need to think about using codeless automation tools.

Unrealistic Expectations/Approach: I will split that one into two parts. The first is an erroneous understanding of the ROI (return of investment) of test-automation and the second component is unrealistic expectations per-time framework. There is A job as good as it is made by you, and you cannot expect something without investing time, to deliver value. I have spoken to a QA Engineer that told me he obtained 6 hours weekly to compose an undercover infrastructure. What should you expect him to achieve 6 hours?

In order to make this work you need to inquire:

  • What exactly are the goals you wish to accomplish together with your test automation?
  • What would be regarded as a fantastic value for the efforts/time?
  • What are the criteria for achievement?
  • Just how much time/money are you prepared to spend so as to make it happen?

Automation is not a "Launch and Forget" assignment. You want to acknowledge that it is a continuous process that requires maintenance, a group effort, and advancement.

I have to acknowledge, that sadly by what I have seen, some companies perceive providing a QA Engineer an undercover job as only a way to preserve a worker or put in some"spice" into his weekly routine. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we shouldn't conserve our workers or provide them the time to learn and progress, I'm only saying it should be aligned with expectations that are realistic and transparency into the worker, that itself.

Insufficient Planning: A fantastic Automation project must start with a high-level plan and plan, that will develop into a comprehensive technical style. Even the"One size fits all" strategy can be catastrophic for your success. What worked excellent for a single company does not necessarily indicate it would do the job for you. That announcement can be true about an instrument choice. Whenever you do not actually have to use the technology in question, it goes up to buzz word. This is immensely important to note. There is a large number of open source and commercial tools out there which can provide value-for-money that is high and without even considering the alternatives and the benefits/ alternative these tools can offer. Choose a tool which will meet your needs. Here are my two cents - it's far much better to pay for a solution rather than wasting a lot of times (That will step up to be far pricier than the program's cost tag).

Now, as we continue to discuss the way to plan our design, we will have to think about our all-around technical architecture and business requirements. Here are just some of the aspects you should take into consideration:

  • Imagine jobs, modules, business flows would people examine?
  • What is the planned policy for each execution phase? (Sanity, Regression, CI/CD dedicated package?)
  • What are the main shared/common/repeating flows/functionality?
  • How do we plan every test for a brief standalone artifact? (SetUp and TearDown, dependency on outside Data instead of generated evaluation Data, What needs to run before each test, suite class?)
  • How do we prevent one evaluation"breaking" another if they run in concurrency?
  • How can we produce a good scalable, clean and appropriate atmosphere? (Mock servers, Database cases, Cleanup script, browser preferences, Grid/Server configurations, Setup and Cleanup, Virtual surroundings or docker containers).
  • What exactly build tools if we use?
  • Exactly how could our dependencies be managed?
  • Where's our project be stored?
  • Just how many engineers are working on the project and the way the variant management would be managed?
  • What CI tools are best to perform our builds?
  • Will you be implementing CI/CD workflow?
  • Where will you run your tests and resources can you use to design your own execution platform? (Are you supplied with the funds to purchase cloud solution permits? Do you have the tools or support to establish your own Selenium Server infrastructure?)
  • Exactly what kind of Tests will soon be automatic? (API, Visual Concepts, Server processes, Web/UI Automation, Mobile - Android/IOS).
  • Are there some large data collections, long flows, complicated processes, integrations that would call for additional assessment?
  • What should we test through the GUI and that which could be more secure to check via the API?
  • Exactly what Logs, Reporting mechanisms, Handlers, and listeners do we will need to implement so as to create our root cause evaluation and debugging simpler? (What's a one-hour automation suite if you devote a day comprehension the outcome?)
  • What metrics/report/output should the runs supply?
  • Exactly what integrations do we really want? (Reporting programs, ALM Tools, Bug Trackers, Evaluation management programs ).
  • Who may compose the infrastructure and who are supposed to implement the tests? (Can there even be a branch between both?)
  • Who's responsible to offer the Automation Engineers with the business flows/Test cases/ Business logic that is supposed to be automatic?
  • Are there a POC (Proof of concept) stages defined to determine future targets?

That's just some of the questions in a nutshell and what you should take out of this is that

A suitable tool option, superior planning/design is likely to produce the difference between failure and success.

Automating everything: An important point to note is that not what can or has to be automatic. At times perception or wrong management decisions, we automate everything which comes to the tester's head or blindly convert test cases into scripts. First of all, not all evaluations are appropriate to automate. Second of all, the test-cases themselves are not acceptable for the job. This ends in an unmaintainable bunch of automatic tests that is impossible to keep and sadly the majority of the occasions it is going to lead to marking out a lot of our written work. There's no additional value in automating if your company doesn't have the funds to maintain automation teams tens of thousands of test instances that occasionally check the same business logic.

We also will need to produce a clear plan about what needs to maintain every automation build. What is included in our regression? What's described as our Sanity? What is secure and reliable enough to enter our CI/CD Pipeline?

Test-Automation needs solid planning, understanding, commitment and dedication to deliver appropriate value.

Lack of skills/ proper instruction, Incorrect tools choice, insufficient resources, lack of appropriate preparation, Unrealistic anticipation, all of which may make a project fail.

I am hoping that this report will have a positive impact and help a few of you to follow a productive mindset.