The final article in a three-part series I wrote for SearchSoftwareQuality.com on Session-Based Test Management was posted last month:
- Using session-based test management for exploratory testing
- Using session-based test management for exploratory testing coverage problems
- Solving problems with session-based test management
A similar article, on exploratory testing in agile environments posted just before that series:
If you get a chance to read them, please let me know what you think. I’m interested in how others manage exploratory testing.
Mike –
Thank you for these articles. I love the idea of calculating carter velocity! I would be wary of trying to map coverage depth to A, B, and C-level charter completion quite so simply, though. I’ve never found them to correspond as well as you have. I tend to make the determination of coverage depth on a per-area basis during debriefs or standups, using the charters as supporting material but going with the team consensus.
I especially appreciate the link to the medical device testing article. It seems to support my feeling that there need to be two testing processes in the regulated world, both of them sunlit and legitimized: a scripted one for demonstrating conformance to standards, and an adaptive, sapient one to evaluate the software. Are regulators open to both these types of testing?
In general, I’ve not found many regulators open to SBTM (or any flavor of exploratory testing). Even getting something as simple as model-based test automation is hard to get people to understand in that environment.
Its really good article on Session-Based Test Management especially the link to the “benefits of exploratory testing in agile environments” its really good and it could be very informative for the beginners in this field. I got an Article on “exploratory testing in agile environments” from macrotesting http://www.macrotesting.com its so nice as yours and it have many examples to discuss. Thank you for your post Mike……