Approaches to Automation

There are three broad options in Test Automation:

Full Manual

Partial Automation

Full Automation

Reliance on manual testing Redundancy possible but requires duplication of effort Reliance on automated testing
Responsive and flexible Flexible Relatively inflexible
Inconsistent Consistent Very consistent
Required for automation - -
Low implementation cost - High implementation cost
Low skill requirements - High skill requirements
High repetitive cost Automates repetitive tasks and high return tasks Economies of scale in repetition, regression etc


Fully manual testing has the benefit of being relatively cheap and effective. But as quality of the product improves the additional cost for finding further bugs becomes more expensive. Large scale manual testing also implies large scale testing teams with the related costs of space, overhead and infrastructure. Manual testing is also far more responsive and flexible than automated testing but is prone to tester error through fatigue.
Fully automated testing is very consistent and allows the repetitions of similar tests at very little marginal cost. The setup and purchase costs of such automation are very high however and maintenance can be equally expensive. Automation is also relatively inflexible and requires rework in order to adapt to changing requirements.
Partial Automation incorporates automation only where the most benefits can be achieved. The advantage is that it targets specifically the tasks for automation and thus achieves the most benefit from them. It also retains a large component of manual testing which maintains the test teams flexibility and offers redundancy by backing up automation with manual testing. The disadvantage is that it obviously does not provide as extensive benefits as either extreme solution.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Progress 4GL interview questions for QAD technology

QAD interview questions for SE and Eb2 version

Use of API in QAD EE