Compare Traditional testing vs. CEPOCH

Software Testing Types
September 18, 2015
Test Automation ROI Calculator
September 18, 2015

Compare Traditional testing vs. CEPOCH

Test automation is vastly different from traditional manual testing.  Evolution of automated testing is rather steep and rapid.  Scope of automated testing is ever expanding and its portion in the overall software testing pie is growing substantially.  More and more companies are exploring ways to reduce manual testing efforts and expenses, and migrate to automated testing methods where feasible.  Advancement in testing technologies making this an attractive and realistic proposition for clients.    CEPOCH unique patent pending innovative approach makes this distinction between manual and automated testing even more noticeable.

 

Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)

Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for QA includes people costs, training, test infrastructure and technologies.  TCO of manual testing comprises of personnel costs, infrastructure costs, training, personnel costs to assess, prepare, and execute test cases and manage defect and subsequent re-execution.  CEPOCH’s automated testing approach avoids on-prem infrastructure costs and framework setup costs , and employs repeatable hands-free automated test execution and hence requires fewer FTEs. Hence, TCO of CEPOCH Automated Testing framework is only a fraction of manual testing approach. Additionally, as the person dependency is reduced, cost projections are predictable enabling leadership to gain confidence in budgeting.

 

 

Testing Scope

This area of the test plan will look significantly different between manual and automated testing approaches. With automation testing, for example QA teams will focus on determining which test cases will be viable to be continuously regressed across multiple cycles and which scenarios will be reusable. Manual testing, however, will include things like exploratory testing and other cases that don’t work well with automation integration.  Typical examples include, frequently changing processes, scenarios that require extensive user intervention, hands-on execution and analysis and fine tuning, immersive user experience.  These tests that can’t benefit much from automation.

All use case scenarios can be incorporated into manual testing approaches.  However, as QA personnel costs increase and release cycle time reduces, QA teams gravitate towards test case sampling thereby reducing the overall number of test cases executed. By compressing test cycle time and reducing test effort via repeatable testing effort, CEPOCH’s automated test framework allows QA team to maintain higher level of test case execution. Nonetheless, highly complex and unique test scenarios while can be automated, the effort involved in building and validating the process is rather substantial and offsets any efficiency gains in automation.  Hence, CEPOCH’s Automated Test Case repository will have selected test scripts that are proven to enrich and improve test efficiencies leaving residual test scenarios for manual testing.  Overtime, as the repeatability and value of these test cases increase, the QA team can pursue automation to increase value realization from automation investment. Overall, with CEPOCH’s solution delivers up to 40% more validation coverage than manual testing.

 

Test Cycle Duration

Test Cycle Duration metric refers to the total execution time of the test cycle that includes test case definition, test data preparation, test environment creation and management, test execution, test results management and defect management.

Test Cycle Duration or elapsed time for Manual testing approach is substantially longer for a given set of resources. Test case preparation, test execution, test results recording and rerun of testing consumes a significant portion of overall test cycle effort and timeline.  As the test environments and repetitions grow, the total duration of the . Manual testing duration grows proportionally to increased number of environments and repetitive test iterations.

With CEPOCH’s Automated Test Suite, the Write Once Run Many (WORM) approach, test cases are recorded once automatically and can be executed several times iteratively without manual intervention.  Automated runtime environment monitoring, logging, defect management modules and processes in CEPOCH’s Automated Testing Framework will further reduce elapsed time of testing phase.  As a result, the elapsed time for test cycle will be flat regardless of number of environments or test iterations.  Compressed Testing Phase cycle time and thereby accelerating overall time-to-market of the software applications has immense benefit to clients using the Automated Test Suite.

 

Compliance & Risk Management

Automated testing offers improved transparency and confidence in test execution compared to manual processes.   Accurate regression testing with different application versions validates that the existing functionality is not broken.  Automated system logging and hands free defect tracking enables proper documentation and facilitates better application auditing.  Logging of test activities and adherence to Segregation of Duties (SODs) improve the policy and regulatory compliance and thereby improves risk mitigation. CEPOCH’s Automated Test Suite provides all these features and capabilities to improve governance, compliance and risk management.

 

Defect Tracking

Although both manual and automated testing mechanisms, will do their best to eliminate and track issues, their approaches to doing so will differ slightly tool to track the severity of the problem and a test management solution to store all of the information related to these events.

With automation, any defects and vulnerabilities can be instantly logged and QA will be notified to respond accordingly. In manual plans, defects must be entered manually, and this information can take time to sort out. However, both testing methods can utilize best test management software to easily access tasks, and ensure that any problems have been dealt with. This will help teams reclaim time and prevent bugs from causing major damage.

 

Conclusion

Although there are a number of things that automation and manual planning have in common, the costs, scope and defect mitigation processes are all going to differ. By understanding these characteristics, QA teams can create a more successful test plan and approach their projects with confidence. CEPOCH’s Automated Test Environment and Test Execution delivers transformational outcomes and substantial value addition over manual testing.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *