Hoberg's test octagon

ConfidentialPA12013-12-131

Hoberg’s Test OctagonMapping the attributes of a test activity


Introduction

▪ Brian Marick first developed the agile testing matrix [1]

▪ Lisa Crispin then used this in her book “Agile Testing” [2]

▪ There have been many interesting developments of the model [3][4]

▪ The purpose of the agile testing matrix is to categorize test activities in four distinct quadrants to help plan the necessary testing [2]

▪ Categorizing test activities is all about granularity – sometimes it is enough to have 2 categories, sometimes you have to have 20


Introducing Test Activity Attributes

▪ To be able to categorize test activities we need to know what distinguishes different test activities from each other

▪ We need to identify the different types of attributes that a test activity can have

▪ We also need to identify the different values that the different attributes can have

▪ Once we have done this, we can create any categorization model we want to, which meets our specific granularity needs


Test Activity Attributes Overview

Generated Value

Stakeholder

Executor

Report Granularity

Scope Flexibility

Definition of Done

Required Tool Support

System Complexity


Generated Value

▪ What value does the test activity generate?

▪ Finding defects?

▪ Passing certifications and standards?

▪ Meeting customer requirements?

▪ Generating decision material and other information?

▪ Supporting developers in some other way?

▪ Provides start criteria for other test activities?


Stakeholder

▪ Who are the stakeholders of the test activity?

▪ The project leader?

▪ The developer?

▪ The system architect?

▪ The line manager?

▪ The test leader?

▪ Other testers?


System Complexity

▪ How predictable is the (sub-)system under test?

▪ A small unit is often more or less predictable if it is tested in a controlled environment

▪ A large system is often unpredictable, even if you have system requirements, and the system is made up of many small predictable units

▪ Sub-systems can be more or less predictable


Report Granularity

▪ On what level is reporting necessary?

▪ Does every test have to be recorded in detail?

▪ What measurements to the stakeholders need?

▪ Is it enough with general quality feedback?

▪ What will the information in the report be used for?


Scope Flexibility

▪ What possibilities does the tester have to affect the scope?

▪ Is the scope completely fixed?▪ Certification / Standard

▪ Customer requirements

▪ Is it semi-flexible?▪ Could be that priority 1 test cases have to be executed, but the rest is

risk-based

▪ Is it completely up to the tester?▪ Can you run which ever test sessions you want, without any pre-set

scope?


Required Tool Support

▪ Does the activity require certain tools?

▪ Bluetooth testing, power consumption tests, 3GPP tests, all require specific equipment to run the tests

▪ Activities such as integration tests which are run in a continuous integration system need to be automated

▪ User-focused test are examples where no specific tools are usually needed


Executor

▪ Who executes the tests?

▪ Dedicated tester?

▪ Developer?

▪ Developer-in-Test?

▪ External User?

▪ Internal User?

▪ External test house?


Definition of Done

▪ When is the test activity over?

▪ When all tests are executed?

▪ When a time period has passed?

▪ When the tester says so?

▪ When the first defect is found?

▪ When the stakeholder says so?


Evaluating Attributes

▪ Once you have all activities mapped with attributes and values you can start comparing and evaluating them

▪ This can give you insight into for example if two activities are very similar and perhaps redundant

▪ It can also show that there are gaps in some areas, if many activities have similar attribute values, and parts of the value-spectrum is not covered


How attributes affect test method

▪ The test activities themselves to not force a specific test method

▪ Scripted testing / Session-based testing / Ad-hoc testing

▪ Manual / Automated / Tool supported

▪ But often if you look at the attributes, you will get hints as to what is more or less suitable as a method for that activity


Conclusion

▪ The reason why there are 8 test activity attributes described here is totally arbitrary and only because I wanted to use octagon in the title – which attributes are relevant is completely context dependant

▪ By having all relevant attributes mapped out, it becomes much easier to plan, and find gaps and redundant activities

▪ How many attributes you choose to use is based on what granularity you need for your planning (and if you want to have a cool sounding model name)


References

[1] Brian Marickhttp://www.exampler.com/old-blog/2003/08/22/#agile-testing-project-2

[2] Lisa Crispinhttp://lisacrispin.com/2011/11/08/using-the-agile-testing-quadrants/

[3] Gojko Adzichttp://gojko.net/2013/10/21/lets-break-the-agile-testing-quadrants/

[4] Markus Gärtnerhttp://www.shino.de/2012/07/30/the-testing-quadrants-we-got-it-wrong/

http://www.exampler.com/old-blog/2003/08/22/

http://lisacrispin.com/2011/11/08/using-the-agile-testing-quadrants/

http://gojko.net/2013/10/21/lets-break-the-agile-testing-quadrants/

http://www.shino.de/2012/07/30/the-testing-quadrants-we-got-it-wrong/

Hoberg's test octagon

Technology

Transcript of Hoberg's test octagon