In real-world testing scenarios, it’s common to encounter projects where documentation is incomplete or requirements are unclear, yet the need for thorough testing remains critical. This situation can pose significant challenges for testers, who must rely on limited information to ensure the application meets both functional and business needs. In this discussion, we invite QA professionals to share their approaches for handling such situations. Techniques may include collaborating with stakeholders for clarification, using exploratory testing to uncover edge cases, developing assumptions to create test cases, and leveraging past experience or domain knowledge. The goal is to explore how testers can maintain test quality, reduce ambiguity, and ensure coverage when formal requirements are lacking.
How do you deal with situations where there's insufficient documentation or vague requirements, yet thorough testing is still expected?
+1In real-world testing scenarios, it’s common to encounter projects where documentation is incomplete or requirements are unclear, yet the need for thorough testing remains critical.
For me your statement implies that well written documentation and requirements are a prerequisite to to do good testing. On which I disagree. Sure, having both in good quality helps. But testing, exploring the product and looking for potential problems, can often also be achieved without it.
Focus on people, not on artifacts.
Documentation and requirements are always unclear to different degrees. Even a initially very good written document can become outdated when not constantly maintained. People (when available) can give you up-to-date answers more easily. Tip: note the answers and care for that the documents are updated.
+5In real-world testing scenarios, it’s common to encounter projects where documentation is incomplete or requirements are unclear, yet the need for thorough testing remains critical.
For me your statement implies that well written documentation and requirements are a prerequisite to to do good testing. On which I disagree. Sure, having both in good quality helps. But testing, exploring the product and looking for potential problems, can often also be achieved without it.
Focus on people, not on artifacts.
Documentation and requirements are always unclear to different degrees. Even a initially very good written document can become outdated when not constantly maintained. People (when available) can give you up-to-date answers more easily. Tip: note the answers and care for that the documents are updated.
While I understand the importance of well-written documentation and requirements in supporting testing efforts, I believe they are not strictly prerequisites for effective testing. Testing, by nature, is an exploratory process that often reveals potential issues regardless of the quality of documentation. Of course, high-quality documentation can help, but focusing too much on artifacts can limit the testing mindset.
Instead, prioritizing people and communication is key. Documentation and requirements are often subject to varying interpretations and, as projects evolve, can quickly become outdated if not regularly maintained. Engaging with team members and stakeholders can provide more accurate, real-time information. It’s crucial to document these interactions and ensure the knowledge is reflected in updated documents, maintaining alignment across the team.
Reply
Login to the community
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.