Select Page

How to Integrate Manual Testing Into Your Automation Processes in DevOps

Time flies in the fast-paced world of software development. QA and engineering teams rarely get to take a deep breath and reflect on what has happened in the past few weeks, months, or even years. This is exactly what we’ll do now.

From Waterfall to Agile: A brief history of software development

Although Agile development frameworks such as Kanban were invented in the 1940s, the waterfall approach remained the most popular method for a long time. However, with new technologies starting to emerge and markets becoming more and more global — and as a result, more competitive — consumers started to raise their requirements and expectations. At the same time, the average lifespan of products started decreasing. Long story short: the waterfall model slowly began to phase out.

Agile methodologies rapidly gained popularity and are nowadays widely used for software development projects. They enable companies to adapt faster to the ever-changing external factors, and swiftly integrate learnings in their development processes. In a VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous) world, being Agile became a competitive advantage.

By using Agile methodologies, companies are able to quickly react to changing requirements. Fast releases have become the new normal, and the speed factor has lost its status as a competitive advantage. So what’s next?

A brief introduction to DevOps, and how it complements Agile methodologies

Let’s not ask ourselves what’s next, but rather what’s now. And the answer is DevOps. DevOps is the ability to constantly ensure full operational and business readiness. It is a set of practices that automates and manages the full end-to-end engineering processes between software development, QA and IT operations teams.

Through this methodology, those teams can build, test, and release software continuously and more reliably. This helps teams get a more holistic view of their internal processes, and complements the external and customer requirements-oriented approach of Agile frameworks.

For organizations wanting to ensure high quality and a smooth deployment process while having multiple teams work together on the same products, DevOps represents an attractive and modern option.

Let’s automate everything!

In the past, both in waterfall and Agile methodologies, the QA department received a notification when development was over and a new build was ready for testing. QA would continue with their manual regression tests, complete feature-based tests for all new components and add some exploratory testing on top. Once QA completes testing, the build would either go back to development to be reworked, or the organization would push it live.

Scaling up to multiple teams, this approach is not sustainable anymore. The need to constantly juggle different builds on different staging environments often creates confusion.

Therefore, QA teams need to adapt — and align much more. Here is how they can do so:

  1. Standardize environments
  2. Automate deployments
  3. Automate testing (including pre-testing and post-testing tasks)
  4. Automate and group test cases to efficient sets (smoke tests, regression suites) to achieve 100% code coverage
  5. Reliably time-box testing

To make it clear: teams should automate as much of the testing process as possible in order to run automatically when needed, in an efficient and effective way. Automation creates less manual work, and helps bring the QA and the IT infrastructure teams together — specialized automation and CI/CD tools can successfully achieve this. Furthermore, a mature automation framework becomes paramount so that teams can swiftly script and add new test cases.

Can the whole testing process really be automated?

Unfortunately, even if 100% code coverage can be achieved, you can never have a 100% certainty that there will be zero bugs or problems. Therefore, the answer to the above question is ‘no’, for three reasons:

1. You can’t know everything

Automated test cases have one big potential flaw: they are written by humans. Now, that may sound mean, but let’s face it, an individual can only think of a limited amount of scenarios. And even if the full code is covered, different ways of processing it with other variables/test data or on other test environments may break the code. Furthermore, after a while, your extensive experience will backfire in the form of operational blindness. You may no longer expect any problems in a certain area because nothing ever happened. The problem is, you don’t know what you don’t know.

2. You can’t do everything

Now, let’s imagine you are an exception and you do in fact know everything! (Please note that I am jealous at this point.) Yet, there are technological limitations, which means that even if you would like to automate certain cases, you couldn’t even do so. One concrete example: a script for which the phone needs to be turned off and on again. Too bad!

3. You won’t do everything

Oh! So you are a smart one, and suggested building a robot that takes care of the physical interactions, such as pushing the on-button again and again using the fingerprint sensor. This could work, but typically everyone has to deal with scarce resources — money and time. On the one hand, purchasing all devices to run tests on them would just be too expensive. On the other hand, this would take ages, and for that reason, block the process.

You will therefore most likely go for a prioritized list of devices to cover and a selected fraction of the test case variations that could be run.

Furthermore, testing in the real world does not only consist of covering the functionality. There is much more to be covered such as the usability, payment integration, localization, etc. Much of which is beyond the regular scope of DevOps.

The key to successfully testing in DevOps: Find the right testing mix

The world is never black and white, and the happy path isn’t always enough. In DevOps, automation is key and moving in this direction is vital for all companies that seek a competitive advantage in the digital field.

Yet, for most businesses, automating everything that can be automated simply won’t work. The risk of failure would be too high in many areas, such as:

  • in non-functional areas
  • when there’s a broad customer base with different systems
  • for scenarios that weren’t considered when scripting the test cases

For that reason, manual testing — especially exploratory testing with real users and real devices — is a great addition to ensure that all areas and external factors are covered.

How to integrate manual testing into DevOps?

The fact that DevOps puts emphasis on automating processes makes it look like there is no space left for manual testing. This is not true, and as the points above illustrate, manual testing remains a very important part of the testing mix for most companies.

One way of finding the right balance between manual testing and automation is the usage of feature flags. Feature flags are used to enable, disable, or hide the feature in production. Thanks to these, the code can be shipped to production and run through all the automated testing and deployment processes, guaranteeing a certain level of quality.

Then, when in production (or staging, etc.), the feature flags can be turned on for a certain percentage of the user base or for the QA team, so that manual testing can take place. This way, additional insights can be gained and circled back to the development team. The length of such tests also does not impact the new DevOps processes and are, for that reason, a great addition.

Read more about our Integrated Functional Testing solution to learn how to combine manual testing and test automation in one cohesive approach.

Whitepapers

Integrated Functional Testing in a QA strategy

Test automation has its benefits and limitations. With Integrated Functional Testing, you get the best of both worlds: manual testing expertise and automation for simpler test cases.

Apps targeting young people

Naturally, banks and online brokers are also increasingly offering mobile solutions for stock trading. However, this new group of fintech startups has a different structure than traditional providers. As international apps with social media appeal, they are aimed at a particularly young target group of 25- to 35-year-olds who want not only access to stock trading but also a new kind of user experience. It has become clear that accessibility and user-friendliness are key selling points for these new investment apps. For example, according to Bitkom’s Digital Finance Report 2020, 40% of respondents expressed the expectation that “smartphone apps’ ease of use for stock and securities transactions will enable more people to benefit from companies’ performances.”

In a nutshell, the easy access via smartphones makes these “neobrokers” so appealing. Clear design, community integration, and ease of entry has turned UI/UX into an actual product.

Special opportunities – special risks?

Many apps have little to no limit on how small a trade can be, making it possible to buy fractional shares. As mentioned, they charge very low fees — or none at all — and are available outside of regular trading hours. The apps clearly aim to lower the entry threshold for stock trading, and sometimes lure new users with free shares. On the flip side, the apps offer no or minimal investing advice, unlike traditional brokers. Consequently, purchasers must do their own research outside of the app, using articles, forums and social media. This aspect has raised suspicions in the German market. In the survey undertaken for the Bitkom Digital Finance Report referenced above, 69% of respondents stated that “an advisor’s input is absolutely key to making good investment decisions.” As a result, the separation of professional advisory services and the gamification of trading stocks carries certain risks, especially for inexperienced users.

Too much power?

The potential dynamics unleashed by direct market access were demonstrated in an interesting case study in January. Small investors coordinated a purchase of GameStop stock via Reddit to prevent a decline in the company’s value, on which hedge funds had speculated. In fact, the Reddit community’s actions were so successful that U.S. authorities are now investigating the possibility of market manipulation. Outrage erupted, however, when Robinhood simply suspended trading in GameStop shares at the height of the buying frenzy.

Ultimately, the neobroker did have a good reason for halting trading. The security it had deposited with clearinghouse DTCC was insufficient to match increased trading volume. However, this episode illustrates that some luster has fallen from the new market power of small investors: Even trading apps do not eliminate the intermediary function; they only replace it, sometimes with even more opaque conditions than before.

The outlook is promising

And yet, neobrokers are attracting young investors by reinventing the process of investing and stock trading. With pleasing designs and customer experiences geared toward millennials, these apps will be able to gain many users in the next few years. At that point, they will have to show that they can keep up with the momentum that they created. Users expect apps, acting as financial service providers and managers of highly sensitive data, to be error-free at all times and in all places – and rightly so. User trust and compliance with financial rules will play a crucial role in determining whether neobrokers will remain competitive as market penetration continues.

However, the new investment apps’ penetration of the DACH market is still at an early stage. Established providers, especially banking apps, may leverage the trend by incorporating a more attractive UX and simplified investment features into their existing apps. For example, a whitepaper from the Sparkassen Innovation Hub on the topic of changing values recommends “opening up products to small investment amounts” as well as “using a clear, appealing interface (UI), playful elements for data entry and maintenance, [and] the use of status and progress indicators to guide users through processes” to attract a new group of potential investors.

One thing is certain: The phenomenal growth of investment and trading apps, especially in Germany, could be a precursor to interesting developments in the coming years.

Want to see more like this?
Constantin Büker
Constantin Büker
Former Senior Director, Testing Services EU at Applause
Published On: July 9, 2020
Reading Time: 7 min

Avoiding The Hidden Cost of Payment Failures

Learn how you can improve your payment experience and protect revenue across markets, methods, and moments.

Claude Code Crash Course: How to Master Claude Code for QA Engineering

Discover how you can use Claude Code to safely implement AI tools and skills to accelerate your testing lifecycle.

Why Test Plans Fail in the Real World

Your current test strategy might be the reason products fail. Find out why test plans must be adaptable.

How to Conduct AI Evals: Best Practices for Building AI Confidence

Discover why AI evals are crucial for releasing with confidence and get best practices for improving AI system performance.

Crowdtesting vs. System Integrators

Compare system integrator testing with managed crowdtesting services to find the right QA approach for real-world digital quality.

EU AI Act: A Practical Guide for QA Leaders

See how the EU AI Act affects QA and product leaders — and how to adapt testing workflows ahead of compliance deadlines.
No results found.
This site is registered on wpml.org as a development site. Switch to a production site key to remove this banner.