Why do so many testers have an identity crisis?
Why do so many testers think they aren’t enough? That they should be ashamed of their role? That they should be called something different in order to get the respect they desire and deserve?
Well, I can venture a guess!
Many other people in our work context hold testing in low regard. Most people, who aren't testers, think testing is a Factory kind of process, centred around test cases that are easy to automate. No wonder they have a low opinion about testing.
I have gone through this circle myself. I will explain why I was trying to escape being a tester and why I am now back to calling myself a tester (test consultant, to be exact). And this time, I'm 100% okay with it.
The problem
When I was a junior tester, all was well. I saw no problems with being a tester because I lacked the knowledge to see them. Testing was sold to me as a viable career with impact on the software that was made, and it appealed to me.
It wasn't until I had a few years of experience, that I was starting to doubt testing. People around me had opinions about testing: It should "shift left", you should automate as much of it, you should catch all the testing work in test cases. Just to name a few things.
My authority and self-confidence weren't yet established enough to push back against these notions.
The opinions of other people clawed themselves as little hooks into my brain. I started thinking that my role as tester wasn't good enough, that I should strive to be something different.
Our options
I know that I wasn't alone. Testers around me also changed their role. Some went the process route, becoming scrum masters or agile coaches. Usually a choice by the people who enjoyed the people-problems in software development the most.
Then there was the toxic hook of "testers aren't technical enough". God, that one hurt me on a personal level. It caused me the most self-doubt. It made me think that I should be a developer to be deserving of respect. This is the route that makes testers become SDET's, DevOps engineers or just plain ole' developers.
I am not saying all testers have done this out of self-doubt, I am sure it is a better fit for some people. But there are also plenty of testers, like me, who were trying to become something "more technical" in order to fit in and gain manager approval (or developer approval), and not out of an innate desire.
Then, there are the testers who still do things that I would call testing, but they now started calling themselves QA (Quality Assurance) or Quality Engineer. By doing this, they try to move away from the word "tester", which, I guess, has become tainted. By framing their work around quality, they find a path forward. I do not agree with centering test work around the word "quality", so this route never appealed to me.
My journey there and back again.
So let me explain what I did over the last 10–15 years. I started as a tester, but like I said, other people's opinions about testing did a number on me. Going the "process route" didn't initially appeal to me, but I did end up doing a lot of work there. I morphed into a scrum master-lite, personal support to the Product owner, like a project manager-lite. I ended up doing the glue work, all the tasks that people with clear role definitions (and firmer boundaries) said "no" to.
At the same time, I also tried to desperately gain the respect of developers. Becoming more technical morphed into a personal quest. I always thought I was too dumb to learn how to code, so I had to prove to myself that this wasn't true. After lots of anger and tears I managed to break through the barrier, only to find out that coding does not make me happy, at all. It is useful to understand how it works, so it doesn't have that "unicorn aura" around it for me any more, but beyond that it's a dead end for me.
So the time spent learning it wasn't wasted! I learned an important lesson, namely that I don't want to be a developer. Coding is just part of the work that has to be done in order to make good software, it's not the end-all be-all that some people make it out to be.
Also, whatever role you have, in the end we all run into the same big problem. I've written about that before.
Maaike Brinkhof
Knowing that whatever role you have, you end up with a different flavor of the same problem, I could now frame my testing work differently. As added value, an entirely different way of looking at things. This mattered for myself the most, being able to do this.
This wasn't yet the full journey back. Now that the developer route was closed off by personal preference, I thought it would be best if I escaped IT all together. I started my nutrition & strength training coaching company and tried to make that work for 2 years. I didn't make enough money to live from, so when someone in my network offered me a test manager role, I took it.
I'm now back in IT. I mainly do testing work, and some other things (process, automation, agile coaching). I don't neatly fit into the box entirely, but role titles are still a thing, so Test Consultant it is. I am okay with this, I stand behind my work and behind my role.
Maaike Brinkhof
What has changed?
Why am I now okay with the tester role? Why am I confidently carrying this title?
Most importantly, I now have a ton of experience under the belt. I know what doesn't work for me, and I have learned how to speak about testing with people who don't understand the profession. I have more vocabulary at my disposal and examples that illustrate that testing isn't only a process of test cases and automation. Usually, just one pair session exploratory testing is enough to open people's eyes.
Of course, there are also people whose minds you cannot change. You have to be okay with this, and not let their opinion about testing dictate how you do your job! Don't do shoddy testing because other people say so! Grow some backbone, stop bending over so quickly.
As testers, we have to stand up for the quality of our work, it is our profession!
Why are we so quick to please, to change, to doubt ourselves? Yes, testing is widely misunderstood, and that is a big problem. But by abiding these people with awful opinions about testing, we become part of the problem.
We shouldn't pretend automation is the answer.
We shouldn't frame our work around "quality" as the answer (this is controversial, I know. If you believe quality can be measured, or that you can sit in the chair of the "decider that it's good enough" you will not agree with me here).
We shouldn't pretend that testing is a factory process, consisting of only test cases and algorithms.
We should have a better story ready about testing.
Know that story, for yourself, and you'll find that you have increased confidence that you are enough, as a tester. I cannot do this work for you, but I wanted to show you that it is possible.
Comments ()