Here's Why Exploratory Testing Is A Must In QA!



Exploratory testing is used widely in agile models and it enables testers to push the limits of scripted testing.

Scripted testing could be understood as a train on rails. It will never diverge from its path. The end goal of Exploratory testing is to get from point A to point B but any path and deviation that catches your eye along the journey can be considered.

What is Exploratory Testing?

Exploratory testing is performed on the fly and it depends on the tester to think beyond the limits of scripted tests. Exploratory testers plan a test, run it right away, analyze the results, and utilize the information to create the next test.

Why do Exploratory Testing?

Exploratory testing requires more time than scripted tests and it is completed in addition to scripted testing so it may be fascinating to omit.

Nevertheless, exploratory testing finds more bugs.

Here are some statistics:

  1. On average exploratory testing detect 11% more defects than scripted testing.
  2. Exploratory testing finds 29% more than scripted testing defects that can be instantly evident as a missing button on the user interface.
  3. When it comes to finding complex bugs expecting more user actions to cause an error or failure, it jumps to 33% more defects found.

You can find more errors using manual exploratory testing as it offers more freedom to try different types of tests while using your past experience and understanding of the product. Scripted testing, on the other hand, limits the capacity to explore alternative test scenarios to only the processes described in test cases.

Why test cases don't always cover your bases?

Exploratory testing will find more defects throughout a release for several reasons even if you had perfect test cases:

  1. When you test the functional regions and verify flaws, you are likely to uncover several problems. Fixing a problem is frequently another revelation.
  2. If a defect exists and isn't discovered while executing the initial test run it is improbable that the next test running the same test will be able to find the defect. Nevertheless, exploratory testing in the same functional area could expose the bug.
  3. Exploratory testing helps you to go outside the box and employ test cases that would otherwise be excluded from a test case.
  4. Some faults are notoriously difficult to locate and are dependent on a series of circumstances. If you don't have genuine test cases, you risk missing flaws that exploratory testing may find in a less organized but more effective test session.


 

You may also like Understanding Exploratory Testing In Agile

How to structure Exploratory Testing?

Just because this approach is made on the fly it doesn't mean that it isn't structured. Exploratory test management wants to ensure that the following happens:

  • A clear mission of the test is verified.
  • Accurate notes are taken of what should be tested, why, and the assessed quality of the application.
  • Issues and questions ask during testing are tracked.
  • Two testers are assigned dependent upon their experience.

This is obtained through five phases or Session-Based Test Management (SBTM Cycle):

  1. Classify the bugs
    • Categorize the kinds of queries found commonly in past projects.
    • Seek the root cause of these problems.
    • Identify risks and develop ideas for testing the application.
  2. Creator test charter.
    • Identify what and how to test and the factors to be considered.
    • Describe the starting point of testing.
    • Define how users will utilize the system.
  3. Create a time box
    • For at least 90 minutes, two testers should work together.
    • Interaction shouldn’t occur during the 90 minutes.
    • It is permissible to extend or reduce 45 minutes.
    • The testers respond to the application and prepare the right results.
  4. Review results.
    • Evaluate the defects.
    • Learn from the test.
    • Analyze coverage areas.
  5. Debrief.
    • Compile and compare results to the character.
    • Check for required additional testing.

Keeping a Tight Schedule Despite Additional Testing

Combining exploratory tests with necessary script tests can assist keep a strong test effort while reducing the likelihood of release failures.

Do you think this type of testing is worthwhile, but you're short on cash? You might be able to free up some resources somewhere else in your workflow.

Helix TCM, for example, can make it easy to write, run, and track scripted tests. It integrates with other technologies, like Jira, so your team may remain using the tools they're currently familiar with.

Companies with more precise and efficient procedures also ship products more quickly.

To improve your overall testing, see if you can make your present procedure more efficient.

Ad hoc vs Exploratory testing

Ad hoc testing is an informal and free form of software testing procedure that could be performed without intellectual knowledge of the test subject offering the possibility of discovering critical bugs by automation or regression testing.

It is far from structured. Therefore it doesn't obey any rules, goals, documented plans of the target so the efficiency of such kind of testing depends upon the experience level of the tester. It could be avoided without any specifications as Ad-hoc testing is challenging to manage and often has an essential lack of documentation. Any discovered bug will be difficult to reproduce as well.

On the other hand, manual exploratory testing offers freedom of Ad-Hoc testing with more advantages than moderately formal testing. By leaving the room for a tester to think creatively while executing the test. It is compulsory to design documentation of test cases and set a goal. It is a type of testing in which the tester asks questions about what the product can do and how to sort out appropriate testing.

Ad hoc vs Exploratory testing is structured enough that to provide strong results and it has the ability to effectively locating new difficulties in test cases.

Conclusion

Exploratory testing is not traditional, yet it is a highly strong testing method. 

It lets a tester think and motivates them to develop actual test cases for a fault in real-time. Its freestyle character provides it with a new dimension above the other test kinds and may be played anyplace whether it is a project that requires little documentation utilising Agile or waterfall or any project.