Baby Cry Interpreter Followup & New Job!
Checking out the comments on the Baby Cry Interpreter Challenge, the thing that had the most value to me was when one tester would point out the flaw in another tester's plan.
James Bach had a test idea:
"One test would be to play the same recording 100 times and see if the system consistently responded in the same way."
Curtis Stuehrenberg responded with a technical consideration: "Even analog recordings chop off the upper and lower ranges of sound, so recordings are not a true record of the sound generated in life. Digital recordings turn smooth sine waves into a sawtooth pattern unknown in nature."
So, we don't know if this is a test that will help us or not, but it is suggested again later by another tester.
Winner*
Then Amanda Shankle Knowlton brings up something that I love. She suggests that parental satisfaction in actual use is a more important goal than technical accuracy! WOW! She shares the same ethical concerns as others do, but for this reason of considering the customer satisfaction as key, I am awarding a clear win to Amanda on this challenge. The win is because she is prioritizing our testing, a VITAL key to good test strategy. If Quality is value to some person(s) at a some point in time,** kudos to Amanda for clearly pointing out the users of this product and planning to use their feedback. So, what does she win? Sadly, just my admiration and the declaration that she is the winner of this challenge to me.
I am not dismissing the ethical concerns because I agree that it very important. I'm also not dismissing the value of determining accuracy of the product functionality, especially some of the tribal knowledge shared about similar hardware and defects to look for.
New Job!
I have a new job! Starting tomorrow, I am a Senior Consultant (Full Time/Permanent) for Sogeti. My first assignment will be as a QE Lead on a project at Starbucks Headquarters. As a consultant I'll be working as a CW (contingent worker) at Starbucks through this project, and then rolled on to other projects as needed. This is a huge learning opportunity for me, as all of my experience for the last 10 years has been at Adobe. I feel thankful to my Adobe colleagues for all that I've learned as well as feeling excited for the new challenge to adapt and ramp up quickly to work with an amazing client team at Starbucks for my first consultant assignment with so much support from the other Sogeti Testing Services consultants.
* Any contest or challenge posted in is very unfair. Results are subjective and is decided by one dictator, otherwise known as the blog writter, Testy Redhead. Any fairness implied is purely coincidental. Irritation, redness, and shortness of breath may occur. If these should happen, please take a deep breath and try enjoying a small dictatorship of your own by issuing an online test challenge and let me know about it. If I find it interesting I may play along so you can mock me.
** The definition of Quality as "value to some person(s)" is defined by Jerry Weinberg. Jerry is much smarter than I am. I recognize the validity of his definition. I'm currently thinking about some additions though. I'm not fully satisfied with that definition, but I say that respectfully, so please don't flame me. The addition of at "some point in time" is a clarification I agree on that Markus Gaertner brought up so I added for the definition I'm using right now. It is subject to change and likely to change. I very much like Jerry's definition, but I'm not sure it does much to help the practitioner define or target either Quality or Value. I read it and say Quality is Value. Hmm. Very true, so great, now I have a synonym of two subjective words, neither of which I can clearly define. Does that help me? To somebody, yes, that helps. I need to define who those somebodies are, prioritize them, and get feedback from them. I think the time factor must be added because I would not buy a slow telephone based modem today, but couldn't live without one in 1993. As technology generally depreciates over time, unlike fine wines, I think it deserves a place in a conversation about quality or value.
James Bach had a test idea:
"One test would be to play the same recording 100 times and see if the system consistently responded in the same way."
Curtis Stuehrenberg responded with a technical consideration: "Even analog recordings chop off the upper and lower ranges of sound, so recordings are not a true record of the sound generated in life. Digital recordings turn smooth sine waves into a sawtooth pattern unknown in nature."
So, we don't know if this is a test that will help us or not, but it is suggested again later by another tester.
Winner*
Then Amanda Shankle Knowlton brings up something that I love. She suggests that parental satisfaction in actual use is a more important goal than technical accuracy! WOW! She shares the same ethical concerns as others do, but for this reason of considering the customer satisfaction as key, I am awarding a clear win to Amanda on this challenge. The win is because she is prioritizing our testing, a VITAL key to good test strategy. If Quality is value to some person(s) at a some point in time,** kudos to Amanda for clearly pointing out the users of this product and planning to use their feedback. So, what does she win? Sadly, just my admiration and the declaration that she is the winner of this challenge to me.
I am not dismissing the ethical concerns because I agree that it very important. I'm also not dismissing the value of determining accuracy of the product functionality, especially some of the tribal knowledge shared about similar hardware and defects to look for.
New Job!
I have a new job! Starting tomorrow, I am a Senior Consultant (Full Time/Permanent) for Sogeti. My first assignment will be as a QE Lead on a project at Starbucks Headquarters. As a consultant I'll be working as a CW (contingent worker) at Starbucks through this project, and then rolled on to other projects as needed. This is a huge learning opportunity for me, as all of my experience for the last 10 years has been at Adobe. I feel thankful to my Adobe colleagues for all that I've learned as well as feeling excited for the new challenge to adapt and ramp up quickly to work with an amazing client team at Starbucks for my first consultant assignment with so much support from the other Sogeti Testing Services consultants.
* Any contest or challenge posted in is very unfair. Results are subjective and is decided by one dictator, otherwise known as the blog writter, Testy Redhead. Any fairness implied is purely coincidental. Irritation, redness, and shortness of breath may occur. If these should happen, please take a deep breath and try enjoying a small dictatorship of your own by issuing an online test challenge and let me know about it. If I find it interesting I may play along so you can mock me.
** The definition of Quality as "value to some person(s)" is defined by Jerry Weinberg. Jerry is much smarter than I am. I recognize the validity of his definition. I'm currently thinking about some additions though. I'm not fully satisfied with that definition, but I say that respectfully, so please don't flame me. The addition of at "some point in time" is a clarification I agree on that Markus Gaertner brought up so I added for the definition I'm using right now. It is subject to change and likely to change. I very much like Jerry's definition, but I'm not sure it does much to help the practitioner define or target either Quality or Value. I read it and say Quality is Value. Hmm. Very true, so great, now I have a synonym of two subjective words, neither of which I can clearly define. Does that help me? To somebody, yes, that helps. I need to define who those somebodies are, prioritize them, and get feedback from them. I think the time factor must be added because I would not buy a slow telephone based modem today, but couldn't live without one in 1993. As technology generally depreciates over time, unlike fine wines, I think it deserves a place in a conversation about quality or value.
Posted by Testy Redhead at 11 Jul 2010 
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: strategy ethics test planning Challenge discussion community security testing safety
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: strategy ethics test planning Challenge discussion community security testing safety
So happy to hear about the new job. After being mostly dark for the better part of a month, I'm glad to come back and find that you are happily employed. I look forward to hearing more updates about your new opportunity!
Reply to this
Wow. "Going dark" is quite a way to put it, and pretty accurate. I'm so excited to get back to work! Not only do I enjoy it, but I've learned I'm not a great unemployed person. For part of the time I was out of town taking care of some important family stuff. I hope you are having a fun summer!
Not only does it look like Wednesday is my first day on the project for the client, but I'm doing a lightning talk for the QASIG! I'll have to post an update after on how the talks went.
Reply to this
Lanette ... okay, new topic semi-related:
What's the correct answer/response to give for after receiving an assignment to test a code drop based on knowingly "unstable" code?
Pre-conditions: no requirements, no unit testing performed.
I used to think there's only "one" correct answer to this as you know, based on a consultancy model. But ...
You as the lucky tester, what would be the best approach here?
Reply to this
Hi Jon,
I wonder if you think this is a "right" answer, but I brought this up to the client in my interview there and explained that I'd like to set up acceptance criteria in advance of scheduled drops so that we all agree on what the criteria is. If it doesn't pass acceptance, we send it back. Note: That doesn't mean we STOP testing, unless fully blocked, but we expect them to deliver a drop of a certain quality. I think being collaborative and transparent is what we can do to get a good result for everyone involved.
What is your take?
Reply to this
Acceptance - i agree for this to be one of the approaches as a build verification test (or an acceptance test). Alan Page @alanpage had mentioned in one of the blog posts and also in "How we test software at microsoft #HWTSAM " in this context. If there was a code dropped for test, it should be doing what it is supposed to be doing. Test should be testing for beyond positive functional tests and not look for what works. That being set, having the BVT scenarios for good functionality written, reviewed, and approved by cross functional teams to be on the same page would certainly adds value and proactive to work against set goals (acceptance criteria in this context).
Reply to this
I think we're talking about two different things here. I'm interested in learning a bit more of how acceptance testing is done other places, but in the past I've had a few levels of tests. First there is a "minimal" set which covers pretty basic functionality. It is the point at which we will reject a build as entirely untestable. However, the standards may be lower than they are at some other places or for some other testers. The ability to use key features successfully with ONE path is enough until a certain point in time, and then the bar raises.
My point is that acceptance for a dev team with no quality standards is about progress, not emulating Microsoft which has a history of testing and quality standards. When I think about acceptance, I think about building a net, starting with a looser net and adding in finer mesh as I go, working with the dev team and client so that we all agree we are getting more of what we want along the way.
I know I sound pretty nontechnical when I explain it like this, but my intentions are to improve the quality over time starting where the client is now, not to impose unrealistic standards and reject more builds.
Reply to this
Hey Testy Redhead!
I have not had time to keep up with all the latest happenings. This looks like it was a fun competition. (I'm certain I would have won, had I seen it earlier.
Just wanted to stop by and congratulate you on your new gig! Sounds great!
Reply to this
Consider this non-trivial quote:
"Testing is the Infinite Process of comparing the Invisible
to the Ambiguous
so as to avoid the Unthinkable
happening to the Anonymous"
In other words - Perfect Testing is a real challenge."
- James Bach
Reply to this
As a quiet member of your community, I just wanted to offer a Congratulations on your new position. Hopefully the time off has given you time to recharge for the next step on your testing journey. Would be interested to hear your opinion of contract work compared to full time in the upcoming months.
-Steve
Reply to this
Not sure if you'll need this in your new line of work, but maybe your cats do! ...
http://jeffdeboer.com/Galleries/CatsandMice/tabid/77/Default.aspx
Reply to this
Hey, Thanks! I am catching up on my feeds and didn't see the new post. I enjoyed this Challenge
Reply to this