I’m proud to be part of the Context Driven Testing Community.
Because of it I have met people who are truly passionate about testing, developed an eagerness to continually improve and been made to feel that it’s “a small world” (thanks to Twitter)
The thing is, I struggle to understand why it’s not the status quo. When I read through the principles, it honestly seems like common sense to me. These are:
The Seven Basic Principles of the Context-Driven School
- The value of any practice depends on its context.
- There are good practices in context, but there are no best practices.
- People, working together, are the most important part of any project’s context.
- Projects unfold over time in ways that are often not predictable.
- The product is a solution. If the problem isn’t solved, the product doesn’t work.
- Good software testing is a challenging intellectual process.
- Only through judgment and skill, exercised cooperatively throughout the entire project, are we able to do the right things at the right times to effectively test our products.
I feel that someone would be hard-pressed to come up with an argument that would stand against these principles. It also means that if you apply these principles, your testing can be a “challenging intellectual process”. Who doesn’t want that?
It makes me wonder… Are we not welcoming enough? What is the perception of the Context Driven Testing Community to other testers (and to people who work with testers)? Have they heard of us?
You can’t expect people to want to learn more about Context Driven Testing if they haven’t heard about it in the first place. But then how do you reach out to those you don’t know are out there (or how to reach them)?
I suppose this post raises more questions if anything and is a bit of a rant. But at the end of the day all I can say is:
If you are passionate about something, and honestly feel that people would find more fulfilment in their work by using this approach – then wouldn’t you want more people to hear about it?