Myths About Test Automation (You Shouldn’t Fall For Anymore)

Some years ago, automated testing (AT) became one of the most promising means to accelerate product delivery and mitigate QA specialists’ workload. As a result, software automation services redefined efficiency in the whole testing process. Today, AT is a popular trend, and, just like other well-known things, it is surrounded by stereotypes. We are here to disprove them and tell you the truth.

Myth #1. Automation is More Expensive than Manual

Myth: Many think that automation is more expensive than manual testing. Specifically, because AT needs knowledgeable, or ‘pricey’ as some may view it, experts, particular automation tools, and continuous test maintenance.

Fact: In reality, test automation is about cost efficiency. Yes, you need to be prepared to invest in automation framework setup and cooperate with experienced specialists. But appropriate resource allocation is the golden rule for a great product. What AT actually offers is evident in the long run due to faster STLC, better quality, speedier releases, and, thus, quicker ROI acquisition.

Myth #2. You Don’t Need Manual Testing if You Go for Automation

Myth: There is this curious perception that automation will push out the need for manual testing. The machine’s accuracy is superior, it does not tire, it makes no mistakes. So, the logical conclusion is that AT is the only way forward.

Fact: Although no one can predict the future, we can be sure that manual testing will be around for a while. Automation makes testing easier, but it is not able to replace manual QA completely. For example, you should not automate new functionalities. You can automate features only after they are complete since, after each alteration, you would have to adjust the test too.

Manual testing is the only way to check novel operations’ stability. And only after exhaustive manual QA automation experts can validate automation possibilities and needs based on unique software requirements. Similarly, some tests just cannot be automated (yet, at least). For instance, ad-hoc testing relies solely on the QA engineer’s creativity and experience to find possible issues.

Myth #3. It Is Possible to Automate Any Manual Scenario

Myth: It is the whole idea behind automation, right? Automate as much as possible, or better yet – automate everything. In this way, you can gain the most out of AT and create the perfect software: suitable for every user, any device, and with no bugs in sight.

Fact: This is a distorted view because any automation tool has its own limits. So, your automation boundaries are defined by available AT software and professionals. Besides, it is easier to test certain scenarios manually, as is the case with UI testing, which necessitates a human perspective. And for some situations, manual QA is the only option, e.g., error guessing – an experimental yet valuable test design technique (we’ve explained how it works in one of our previous articles with test design examples).

Myth #4. A Completed AT Test Script Is Forever

Myth: You know there are test templates that can be used by QA engineers for guidance, i.e., some tests are reusable. And an automated test has preconditions embedded into its functioning. Meaning it will always do what it is told to and produce correct outcomes each time. So if a specialist creates an AT script tailored to your software, it can be put to use up until it is no longer needed.

Fact: Separate builds and your entire app will undergo multiple alterations before the release. And these changes will continue with every update. And AT tests need to keep up with every little shift in the product because the precision of the outcome depends on test maintenance.

Executing the same old test after you have added a new detail, be it a line of code or a full feature, will present results applicable only to the previous version. Thus, any automated test must receive a modification that accounts for any other additions to the project.

Myth #5. Automation Means Immediate Benefits

Myth: Automation lets QA engineers carry out testing fast and locate possible issues in minutes. Hence developers can obtain results promptly and fix reported errors, AT tests can be reused whenever needed, so the software is deployed quickly with little post-release support.

Fact: On the contrary, automation can even be loss-making. You cannot go all in and automate left, right, and center because automation calls for rich expertise and many technical considerations. It is necessary to develop a testing plan and design tests themselves to make everything work as intended and apply AT where it is actually needed. And in the future, you will have to maintain the existing tests and develop new ones as your project scales and updates. This process is virtually endless.

Myth #6. A Universal Automation Tool Exists

Myth: Due to the advantages automation brings to SLDC, there is a myriad of tools for various and highly specific tasks. AT software is extremely helpful and profitable (for its users and developers), but it also means that the industry is quite competitive. And the best way to secure one’s position in the market is to create something that covers all possible testing needs.

Fact: The truth is, if there were such a tool, everybody would be using it exclusively. Instead, what we see is a saturated market where people can choose what they need and combine many options. You can ask any business or QA company, and they will give you a list of tools they employ.

Further, establishing a one-fit-all AT software would be fascinatingly complicated and expensive. It would have to support each operating system, be compatible with all browsers, support any test scenario, etc. There are many automation tools that can help advance your product. But in no way are they a perfect solution for everyone.

Myth #7. 100% Automation Is Always Possible

Myth: We often encounter the phrase ‘automate as much as possible’. And it just seems right. If there is such an option, companies should strive to automate all testing as it would produce faster and better results. So 100% automation is not just a possibility, it is a necessity.

Fact: Well, automation testing may somehow cover 100% of the code, but the result would be questionable. The thing is that it is impossible to check all the options of input and output parameters. An automated test checks only what it is ‘programmed’ to check and cannot go outside set parameters.

Further, automation potential is governed by project needs and complexity. You would not automate all testing at the MVP stage, as a lot will change after. Nor would you use AT for fresh-out-of-the-development-oven functions when it comes to new features and updates. Effective testing is more about finding the balance between manual and automation QA depending on your product goals.

Myth #8. Developers Can Cover Test Automation

Myth: AT necessitates coding knowledge to automate the tests. And who is better at covering programming aspects than developers? Plus, they already use automation tools to review and refine code. So, there is nothing stopping developers from taking on automation.

Fact: Developers and AQA experts hold vastly different positions in the SDLC. The former create the foundation of the software and the latter test features and functions within. After all, you would not appoint a QA specialist to write code. So developers should not be tasked with testing, as it is simply not their responsibility nor their knowledge domain.

To Sum Up

It is unfortunate that so many things are often misunderstood. When guided by false information, you can get yourself into trouble or miss a special opportunity. And in the business world, knowledge makes the difference between failure and success. Test automation is a wonderful product of technological advancement. You can benefit from AT in many areas, but only when it is done right.