You're juggling automated and manual test cases. How do you ensure quality without compromising efficiency?

Balancing automated and manual testing is essential for efficient software development. Automated tests ensure speed and consistency in critical functionalities like authentication and payments,while manual testing identifies nuanced issues and edge cases that require human intuition, especially in usability testing. Tools like Selenium for UI testing and JMeter for performance checks help create a robust automated test suite. Understanding when to automate repetitive tasks and when to rely on human judgment allows your team to deliver reliable software that meets both functional requirements and user expectations. Combining automation's precision with human insight fuels software excellence and innovation.

-Find the sweet spot between automation and manual testing - Optimize efficiency without compromising quality - Continuous monitoring and improvement

To maintain quality and efficiency while managing automated and manual test cases, prioritize automation for stable and repetitive tests, ensuring quick feedback through CI/CD pipelines. Reserve manual testing for exploratory or complex scenarios and prioritize critical test cases. Foster collaboration between teams, regularly review and update automated tests, and invest in training to ensure testers are proficient in both automated and manual testing methodologies.

Striking the right balance between automated and manual testing is crucial for maintaining quality without sacrificing efficiency. Automated testing is best for repetitive, data-driven tasks requiring high accuracy and speed, while manual testing is vital for exploratory, usability, and ad-hoc testing where human intuition is key. We evaluate test cases based on complexity and need for human oversight. Simple, repeatable tests are automated using tools like Selenium, freeing up time for complex scenarios. Regular reviews ensure automated tests stay relevant, and team training keeps our testing robust and efficient.

Automated testing should be used for repetitive testing, covering bugs, and common and uncommon use cases and scenarios. Manual testers should be freed up by automated testing to preform exploratory and no break testing

Test planning is essential for effective software testing, beginning with defining clear objectives and scope, which includes identifying test requirements from documents and acceptance criteria. It involves selecting appropriate testing strategies and techniques like functional and non-functional testing, determining resource needs, and documenting all aspects in a comprehensive test plan. This plan should outline test cases, priorities, schedules, and necessary test data and environments. It requires review and approval from stakeholders to ensure alignment with project goals and timelines. Throughout, it involves risk mitigation planning . Monitoring progress, tracking defects, and adjusting strategies.

Keeping things up to date can be tricky, especially when managing numerous items. I prefer creating one-time test plans related to the features and changes in each release. I review the added features and changed areas, then create a test plan accordingly. Proper test labeling is key. By adding simple descriptions to tests or indicating the areas they cover, I can easily search for and find the tests I need.

Having a test plan at some level is essential for ensuring alignment among all participants in the testing process. Regardless of its format, the plan should establish clear expectations for what needs to be achieved. While it's not always necessary to include every detail, providing at least a high-level plan is vital for effectively guiding the testing efforts.

Test planning is so important to testing, this is the part of the process where you can really dig in to the details of the product or feature a test should cover and develop a plan to cover and test it

Test planning is important as it aligns testing with project goals and requirements. It also provides a clear roadmap for the testing team and the stakeholders.

As I've been enhancing my skill in MABL automation tool,which offers significant advantages such as it utilizes AI for automated test creation, execution, and maintenance, reducing manual scripting efforts and enabling testers to focus on complex scenarios and exploratory testing. Mabl supports cross-browser testing, ensuring consistent functionality across different browsers and platforms. It also provides integrated test reporting and analytics, offering detailed insights into test results, trends, and performance metrics. These capabilities empower teams to identify issues early and make informed decisions to enhance software quality efficiently.

Choosing the right automation tools involves several considerations: 1.Product context. How big and complex is it? How many tests will you have at the top? On which side do you have complex logic - FE or BE? 2.Tech stack context. What programming language do you want to use for automation? What languages do you already use in the company? What CI/CD do you use and which automation tools are it compatible with? 3.Delivery context. Who will write autotests (QA or Devs)? How often do you need to run tests and what is the target runtime for the test build? Since all automation tools have their own pros and cons, asking such challenging questions will help you make the right choice. If I missed something, feel free to add more in the comments.

Manual expertise exemplifies human capability where intuition, experience, and adaptability converge for exceptional outcomes. Unlike automated processes governed by algorithms, it is indispensable in fields like medicine, where skilled physicians interpret nuanced patient conditions beyond automated diagnostics. Similarly, in craftsmanship and arts, manual skill transcends automation, adding unique character to creations. In software development, manual expertise complements automation by addressing complex challenges and ensuring software meets high user standards. It also shines in strategic decision-making roles, guiding teams through uncertainties with human insight and fostering innovation.

Mastering manual testing is a fundamental aspect of software testing. It requires not only deep domain knowledge but also an understanding of various strategies and test types to enhance quality. As technology and processes evolve, mastering manual testing means staying updated with the latest trends, being creative, and applying new techniques to improve testing. Ultimately, expertise in manual testing and strong domain knowledge make the transition to automation smoother and more effective.

Continuous integration revolutionizes software development by ensuring seamless integration of new code while maintaining high standards of quality and efficiency. For instance, in a fast-paced e-commerce platform, CI automates the testing of critical user flows like product browsing, cart management with each code update. This automated validation swiftly detects regressions, ensuring that customer-facing functionalities remain flawless and responsive. By embedding automated tests into CI pipelines, teams achieve rapid feedback on code changes, enabling early bug detection and enhancing overall product reliability. This iterative approach help to deliver stable, user-centric solutions that meet evolving market demands effectively.

Continuous integration pipeline is part of dev ops lifecycle and it has changed the whole idea of testing and automation within software development. Getting constant feedback is a key and with the help of automation test the improvement and feedback is received well in advance helping stakeholders to improve on quality of softwares and bringing confidence within team that we are building the right product which meets the requirements of customer.

CI is super important to help maintain workload and practice Agile methodology. By Continually integrating you are able to manage workload and stay on top of current features and releases

Establishing a robust feedback loop between testing and development teams streamlines bug detection and resolution early in the process, minimizing costs. It enhances communication, aligning teams on project goals and fostering collaboration. Continuous feedback drives iterative improvements, optimizing features based on real-world usage and stakeholder input. This iterative approach supports innovation by encouraging experimentation and creativity. Ultimately, integrating feedback enhances software quality, ensuring products are reliable and user-friendly. It also boosts customer satisfaction by aligning development efforts with user needs and expectations, thereby enhancing market competitiveness and brand reputation.

As technology evolves, early feedback has become crucial. The shift-left trend in development and testing enables early defect detection, fostering continuous improvement. This approach not only cuts costs but also enhances collaboration and builds team confidence. By integrating testing early and promoting collaboration, teams become more agile and adaptable, ensuring high-quality software delivery.

To avoid repeating others, I’ll highlight the importance of minimizing the number of “feedback loops.” This applies to both manual and automated testing. High loop frequency in automation can stem from test instability (how many times must tests run to get a “green” build?). In manual testing, it’s even worse: high loops mean QA and developers frequently switch contexts, wasting resources. Causes include processes, development quality, code review quality, test coverage, etc. A short feedback loop is beneficial, but having fewer such loops might be even more crucial.

In a high-stakes project to launch a satellite communication system, automated testing handled the rigorous checks for data transmission reliability and system performance under varying conditions. However, during manual testing, an eagle-eyed tester discovered a minor anomaly in the system's backup protocol that automated tests had missed. This small glitch, if left undetected, could have jeopardized the entire mission. The collaborative effort between automated tools and human testers ensured that every potential issue, no matter how small, was identified and resolved, guaranteeing a flawless satellite launch and highlighting the indispensable role of both testing approaches in mission-critical projects.

Assume that things change. Most software systems evolve as they mature. As they do so, the risk inherent in each aspect of the system changes too, as does the clients' priorities. Continually ensuring quality and efficiency means your juggling act needs to be flexible and and adaptable enough to handle inevitable changes in risk profiles and clients' priorities and usage. The amount of manual testing required and where it needs to be done will change. Automation tools used in the past may no longer be appropriate or sufficient (or affordable).

This tip could be applied not only Software testing but to Engineering in general - make your decisions based on data, not on guesses. For these you have to have metrics (quality metrics in our case). You cannot really change the things if you can't measure the result. So building a good metrics is a log term investment but it will pay off, believe me.