Enhancing Testing Phase Efficiency: Strategies to Optimize Project Management Process

Image Source: PumpSolutions

Many interviewers tend to focus on specific aspects when answering questions on improving testing efficiency, such as executing test cases faster, encouraging developers to fix bugs more quickly, or implementing automated testing and test management tools. However, these responses often lack in-depth thinking, concrete and feasible methods, and consideration of the entire test management process.

To address this, I suggest dividing the testing process into several stages, including requirements analysis, planning, use case design and review, use case execution (including smoke, internal, joint debugging, and acceptance testing), and collaboration during launch and test summary. It's worth noting that different teams may have varying approaches to requirements analysis and planning, as well as differences in use case execution and overall test round execution.

1. Testers are Best Suited to Understand and Analyze Requirements

Testers are uniquely positioned to have a deep understanding of the requirements and their impact on the testing process. A skilled functional tester is often the one with the best knowledge of the system being tested, its logic, and its practicality. Their insights often go beyond those of project managers and requirements personnel.

As such, testers can provide valuable input during the requirements analysis stage, identifying potential issues such as how a particular change may impact the existing logic, or whether the details have been fully considered. However, in many teams, testers are not involved in the requirements analysis, which can lead to slow progress and poor quality testing.

Therefore, involving testers in the requirements analysis stage and ensuring they understand the finalized requirements can greatly improve the overall testing process.

2. Testers' Plans are Often Subject to Project Cycle

Normally, after testers understand the requirements, they create a use case plan based on the difficulty and time estimation of the requirements. Then, they collaborate with other team members to evaluate and finalize the plan. However, in many cases, the project cycle determines the timeline for task planning.

For example, if a project cycle is three months and the estimated testing time is one month, the testing phase may be compressed to fit the overall timeline. In such cases, leaders or stakeholders may ask to reduce the testing time to half a month, leading to compressed task planning.

Therefore, during the planning stage, it is more important to prioritize and allocate tasks efficiently when the project cycle is compressed. By identifying the main tasks and utilizing the team's talents effectively, testers can develop an efficient plan. Additionally, they can consider overlapping time with other phases, such as conducting use case reviews in advance or entering the test execution phase for certain functions early.

3. Degree of Qualification for Writing Use Cases

In the phase of writing and reviewing use cases, we can enhance efficiency through three aspects: tools, specifications, and comprehensiveness.

To begin with, choosing the appropriate use case management tool for the team is crucial. For a small test group, Excel or mind map may be sufficient, while an online use case management tool may be required for a larger, remote team. Regardless, the chosen tool should be suitable for the team and offer distinct advantages.

The specification refers to the set of rules for everyone to write and review test cases. Writing according to the same specification facilitates subsequent review, execution, collaboration, and personnel changes. The specification should also be straightforward and user-friendly. For example, it should include standardized words for modules, key elements such as test points, preconditions, execution steps, and expected results, and guidance on how to write different elements based on the project situation.

During the review, it is essential to consider factors such as standardization, readability, and understanding to ensure the quality of the output of use cases, which can contribute to the subsequent execution stage.

The comprehensiveness of the use case is also critical. Testers must focus on whether the use case meets the requirements and whether the coverage is complete. However, when an interviewer emphasizes the need to ensure comprehensiveness, we should ask for specific methods beyond stating consistency with the requirement.

This issue can be shared among the team, and further discussion can take place at a later time.

4. Several Common Problems in the Execution Phase

The execution phase of use case testing is the longest and often causes delays in planning. Here are some common issues that can help improve testing efficiency:

• Do you report bugs to developers after accurately locating them?
• Will you help developers troubleshoot critical issues?
• If the smoke test fails, do you have the courage to return the code?
• Do you have preventive measures for related bugs that may occur when fixing a bug?
• If you find that functional logic is unreasonable, will you argue with requirements or project managers?
• Is communication with developers efficient? Is there room for improvement?
• Can you deal with personnel from Party A or third-party acceptance testing?
• Does your team have a self-test process?

These questions highlight specific methods to improve testing efficiency. Let's focus on the fourth question.

During interviews, we often ask about related bugs. If testers can predict related functions or have an analysis plan for solving the bug, they should include it in the remarks. These key issues can be predicted in advance during the requirements and use case review process. A corresponding design plan can be formed to increase attention to these issues and improve the completeness of the plan.

Related bugs can be time-consuming and labor-intensive, so it's best to point them out and pay attention in advance. Most projects can accurately predict related bugs after becoming familiar with them. By predicting one more related bug, testing efficiency can be improved.

5. Final Thoughts

My final thoughts are that while I haven't discussed other stages in detail, I encourage you to take some time to reflect on your efficiency, methods, and goals. If you find yourself struggling, try discussing with colleagues and leaders to break through any limitations you may have.

The methods I've discussed to improve efficiency during the testing phase can be applied to other positions as well. I share these ideas in hopes of bringing you some new and better approaches.

I understand that recruitment in the second- and third-tier cities may be challenging, and the internet industry in these areas may lag behind that of first-tier cities. However, I hope that our team can find suitable personnel soon and that all colleagues in the internet industry can work hard, learn from each other, and grow together.