Author: Sune Engsig

  • No-Code Automated Software Solves a Host of Problems

    No-Code Automated Software Solves a Host of Problems

    There’s a huge disconnect in corporate America, and it’s costing companies big time. The disconnect involves software testing, or, more precisely, the lack of it. More than nine out of 10 CEOs are confident that their company’s software is tested regularly, yet roughly eight out of 10 product testers reported that up to 40% of their software goes out the door with insufficient testing. This dichotomy came to light in the latest Leapwork survey of 500 CEOs and software testers.

    The consequences of untested software are potentially dire and far from hypothetical. Flawed software that delayed the launch of new car models contributed to the dismissal of Volkswagen CEO Herbert Diess, while Facebook saw its market cap value plummet by billions in 2021 when a software glitch came to light. 

    It’s not as if anyone is unaware of such risks: A whopping 95% of CEOs surveyed admitted they’re concerned about losing their jobs if a software failure occurs, while 76% of testers shared that concern. Those feelings are certainly valid, as more than three out of four CEOs reported that software failures damaged their companies’ reputations during the past five years.  

    Despite these realizations, CEOs seem willing to gamble. A full 85% said they considered it acceptable to release software that wasn’t adequately tested, as long as it can be patched later. That attitude has made patching standard operating procedure. More than half the testers said their teams spend five to 10 days a year patching software. 

    Why are organizations willing to take unnecessary risks by releasing software that’s potentially not ready for prime time? There are several common reasons—and a solution that many are overlooking. 

    The Problem with Manual Testing

    One of the major problems is the continued reliance on manual testing, which requires time and resources companies can’t afford. Only 43% of testers said they use automation to some extent in their testing, proving that the majority of testing is still a manual process.  

    That significantly slows product development, an issue for businesses anxious to get their products to market before the competition. Nearly 40% of CEOs said the time-consuming nature of manual testing is one of the primary reasons they release programs that haven’t been properly vetted. Testers clearly feel the crunch, with about one in three saying faster development cycles don’t allow enough time for testing. 

    Given the choice between rushing through testing or delaying a release, companies often roll the dice and opt for the former.  

    Two recent pandemic-related trends have made the situation even more difficult. More organizations are embracing digital platforms to cope with the effects of COVID-19 on their businesses, increasing the need for IT talent. At the same time, upheaval in the labor market has resulted in widespread resignations and job hopping, contributing to a serious shortage of skilled IT personnel. 

    The Coding Conundrum

    Even in this chaotic business climate, experienced software developers remain a hot commodity, with many career options at their fingertips. The competition for talent has left many IT teams scrambling and understaffed, making it difficult to produce high-quality software at a breakneck pace.  

    Eliminating the need for manual testing could relieve the pressure to a great extent. By automating testing, organizations can reduce the burden on staff and minimize the risk of errors caused by deadline pressures. That would allow more testing of more software in less time, which would help move product out the door and into the hands of customers. 

    But automated testing isn’t without its challenges, as many organizations have discovered. Many solutions that are billed as “low code” still demand coding skills beyond the capability of typical business users and testers. That need for coding is an obstacle that can drag down the pace of testing and make it difficult for business users to participate in the process.    

    That challenge grows as the need for ongoing maintenance expands. The test engineers who came on board to set up an automation solution can find themselves bogged down in maintaining code. As a result, speed to market continues to suffer. 

    Democratizing the Test Process

    There is a solution: true no-code test platforms. This type of solution allows both testers and business users to design, run and maintain tests without the need for coding. Business users who understand how the software deliverables are supposed to grow business can be intimately involved in testing, which enhances the quality and functionality of the product and the satisfaction of customers. 

    It also promotes speed. When testing is largely automated and more people are involved, it’s possible to test more software in less time. This eliminates bottlenecks and addresses the issue of scale. The use of automation on a no-code platform has been shown to speed time to market by a factor of 10—an improvement that largely eliminates the need to rush potentially flawed software to market without adequate testing.   

    Organizations can position themselves to meet the growing demand for digital solutions by revamping the way they test software. By eliminating manual testing and adopting an automated platform that doesn’t require coding skills, they can afford to test all their products thoroughly. The end result: They can minimize the risk of bugs that could undermine their success and threaten job security.  

  • This is Not Just a Test: DevOps and the Need to Automate

    This is Not Just a Test: DevOps and the Need to Automate

    Creating software is as much about the process as it is about the product. In recent years, we’ve seen the speed of innovation reach new heights due to more efficient development and quality control. DevOps has further accelerated development by combining software and operations in unified, self-improving teams. With automation taking care of rote tasks, developers can now tackle more difficult issues, resulting in even greater software quality and faster development. The need for speed to market is vital; a month or two can make or break a product launch. Then again, if a product isn’t tested thoroughly in the rush to get to market, flaws can slip through and an organization’s revenue and reputation can take a serious hit. In the U.S., software failures in businesses’ operations systems cost a total of almost $1.6 trillion in 2019. The problem is that it can be a bottleneck and create major delays in the release cycle. In fact, A recent survey of 4,300 developers revealed that it is the top reason that releases are delayed.

    In the past, the waterfall approach was common. Tests usually took place after code was written; carried out by testers who had no interaction with the original developers. As a result, bugs that could have taken moments to correct during development required days or even weeks to fix afterward. Even worse, the complexity of the finished software and its many dependencies meant that fixing a localized bug could introduce additional problems that needed to be fixed after another round of testing, further delaying the release.

    But even in a modern DevOps environment, testers and developers are still speaking entirely different languages. By and large, testers do not code and software developers are not expert testers. The two teams typically converse through multiple logs, event viewers and other operating system tools. It creates a great deal of friction and slows down the process.

    Shift Left 

    DevOps represented a big improvement over waterfall methods but, even so, it’s far from a set-in-stone process. It, too, has evolved and right now, shift left testing has moved into the spotlight.

    In this approach, the guiding philosophy is to test early and often, beginning very early in the development cycle and continuously throughout every stage whenever there’s an opportunity. As a result, bugs are caught early when the relevant code is still fresh in the developers’ minds, so it’s easier to fix. In the end, businesses are able to release higher quality software much faster and more frequently.

    Environmental Tests

    When it comes to the DevOps process, it’s not always clear where and how to automate the process. The following looks at how that can be incorporated into DevOps based on four different environments in a continuous delivery (CD) pipeline.

    These environments include local development (usually a coder’s personal device), a continuous integration (CI) or development server, test servers for user interface (UI) testing and the production environment itself. Each has stages with requirements that must be met for code to advance.

    Whenever any new software features or capabilities are entertained, though, developers and the QA team should begin by answering the question, “How can this be tested?”

    Moving Through the Stages

    Once code is created, it must be able to be built without error, passing all unit tests and local verification.

    This stage is particularly important because the development environment echoes the requirements of production; if it works here it’ll likely also work for the customer.

    At this stage, running early regression and developer verification tests ensures the build is ready while providing feedback about the reliability of the environment. It’s useful to have individual test cases as part of more than one schedule. This enables developers to test minor parts of the software without undergoing regression tests of all product features. These tests should be automated and triggered as part of the same process.

    Developers should have the ability to perform basic tests on their own code. After all, the sooner a flaw is identified, the easier it is to eradicate. Just as testers are not experts in coding, neither are developers expert testers. To shift left and effectively integrate tests at all stages of the development life cycle, it must be automated. This will allow developers to test larger quantities of code earlier and more frequently.

    Once through this stage, the software can advance to the test environment.

    This is where a variety of product tests take place, including those for function, load and performance. Passing this stage entails completing all automated functional UI tests, verification of visual appearance, an inspection of server logs and performance evaluation.

    This is where most regression tests are conducted and automation is crucial for scheduled tests to be triggered.

    Next, the product moves into the production stage.

    Tests still occur in this stage to pinpoint any remaining bugs. Automated tests are then run against the production environment to closely mirror interactions with real end users. At this point, it’s highly unlikely there will be major issues but, if there are, running tests at earlier stages could very well be the culprit.

    Throughout the process, ideally, testers will use a visual, no-code tool to create these automated tests. In this way, testers are able to more rapidly and intuitively implement test automation without having to tap into programming resources. Additionally, the integrated documentation of the actions taken during automation will be interactively connected to visual documentation of the test results. The upshot is that testers and developers gain a shared language for both building test automation and troubleshooting the issues it identifies.

    This is Not Just a Test

    Effective, scalable tests are crucial to delivering the reliable, high-quality software that today’s businesses rely on for day-to-day operations. This is why DevOps and development teams need to integrate tests at all stages of software development. Shift left speeds up the creation of better quality software, which provides a significant market advantage. After all, it’s not just about software quality; it can show which companies are best prepared to meet market demands.