Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Hot Cold Topic "Standards" : Testability of ISO 29119 and Dr. Stuart Reid replies to petition. -- Part 4

Will the software testing business get affected by the ISO 29119? Before picking up this, the question to be picked is, are there any damage that comes to subject and integrity of practitioners and their groups? If subject exist then the business.

Business and ISO 29119

  1. Will the reputed software product companies make use of ISO 29119 standards?
    • I don't know. Do they disclose it if did so with case study? At least I wait for it curiously. Will there be any legal problems for this product company for not using ISO 29119 from customer who brought the product saying this could have avoided if standards were used? What will the software product companies say to world?
  2. Will the software service companies follow these standards?
    • I don't know what legal documents will be signed in between service provider and service seeker. If service seeker brings in ISO 29119 and says it has to be strictly adhered believing it helps her/his product, will the work be highly usable? I don't know what happens. This could be one of the major trouble legally, if the outcome is not acceptable by stakeholder.
    • If the service provider then claims, it is because of IS0 29119, then how this will be received by the WG26 and are we ready to accept it?

People asking for solution will come and business runs, but, the legal problem with testing standards will be solved? Hence I feel, there should be a common understanding, acceptance or denial of standards in Software Testing industry from the academic and industry practitioners groups being one family.

Dr. Stuart Reid responds for petition STOP ISO 29119

The reply from Dr. Stuart Reid can be found here. I have respects for WG26 team and for their accomplishments and skills. Likewise, I have respects for people or group who are opposing ISO 29119, for their accomplishments and skills. But this does not solve the problem. Forget about solving the problem, it will not help in learning the problem itself.

Dr. Stuart Reid, says
  1. WG26 team is well skilled and have rich experience.
  2. Six years have been waited to get the consensus.
    1. I feel,
      • But, why people did not start to oppose as this six years back? Or if started why it was not highlighted then, as now?
        • This gives the hint of, probably not all were aware and hence it did not get the opposing traction?
        • With this, I get the question, did practitioners not bothered to know then? And now it is known, because of Social Media, advancement in use of web,  than the conferences? 
          • If yes, ISO you can see where to make the consensus process public and invite for the review of it.
  3. He himself wish and want to give all standards for free, but he has no enough power.
    • I feel,
      • Dr. Stuart Reid, you can still influence ISO for this to make ISO 29119 free till the Software Testing industry, academic and practitioners groups, come to an common opinion what should be in standards and how it should be, it at all if standards is required.
  4. Any activities in ISO 29119 is not politicized to out rule other player in industry.
  5. Changes to standards will be done consistently based on the feedback received from the use of it.
  6. He says, any standard cannot be mandated as compulsory unless it is enforced by the organization
    • I hope, by the 'organization' mean, the organization which makes use of the ISO standards for the business.
  7. Testing standards is for testers who want see a definition of good practice and to see how close or far they are from it. They are free to tailor it to their context on seeing this.
  8. There is no certification scheme associated with Testing Standards ISO 29119. No where  the ISO/IEC/IEEE testing standards is linked with ISTQB certification scheme. If ISTQB adheres to ISO 29119, it is decision left to ISTQB.
  9. Exploratory Testing is explicitly included as a valid approach to testing in testing standards.
  10. Testers around the world were invited to take part in testing standards development and it is presented in the conferences.
    • I feel,
      • This should reach to people who work using standards than just saying it for people who manages knowing what is standards.
  11. There are number of options for people outside the WG26 to participate and provide feedback.
    • I feel,
      • This needs to be publicized by ISO very much and by WG26 team.
      • Should give the invitation respectfully to group or practitioner if one has different thoughts.
  12. Agrees with 7 principles of Context Driven Testing. But unhappy when testers not belonging to CDT practicing group are assigned to deprecated schools by creating one.
  13. Jon Hagar supporter of CDT and with other WG26 members ensured many of CDT perspectives to be considered.
  14. Has no problem in following risk based and context driven approach simultaneously.
What should I say now after reading these words of Dr. Stuart Reid? Where is the problem? This again confuses for tester as me who has not read the draft content in detail, not spoken to WG26 members, and reading the tweets, FB sharing, blog posts which 
  • opposes the standards (just) saying it affects the craft and subject, Software Testing. How it affects? Why it affects? To whom it affects?
  • supports the standards (just) saying it helps the craft, Software Testing. How it helps? Why it helps? To whom it helps? When it will help?

Now should I say ISO 29119 as good or bad?  Until, there is a common stage where Software Testing's academic and practitioners groups come forward and discuss for betterment of subject, I hope this will not be solved. I have taken the print of Dr. Stuart Reid response and it is here.

ISO 29119, Good or Bad ?

After learning and expressing what I'm seeing in Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4 (this post), I see Software Testing ISO 29119 standards is not yet reached to place where it can be considered for evaluating it further, so the interested people can take decision of it is good or bad

It has much more scope to get stronger in terms of testability. Yes, testability of ISO 29119 has to be improved to study if it is required or not and if required what it should have in it.  How to get it here? Working together and supporting each others in expressing and by leaving as one family.

Does a picture speaks all 4 parts of blog posts?

Different interpretations of "What a standard is?"
Photo Credit: @standardsforum

Concluding Part 4
  1. If the skill is so much emphasized in Software Testing, I want to be skilled than repeating or tweeting or agreeing to others opinion.
    • Hence, in the time I had, I have tried to analyze by learning what is standard, governing bodies of standards, and with available content of ISO 29119
  2. As a tester, I have not said it is good or bad. I have said, it is not yet in testable state if you are expecting me to provide the information to help you in making the decision it is good or bad.
    • When it reaches to the testable state?
      • Refer the previous section of this blog post.
    • What factors are not strengthening the testability of ISO 29119?
      • Refer the blog post series Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4, 

-- End of Part 4 --
-- End --

1 comment:

  1. I continued the discussion of this within myself and the questions were hitting me. If the standards is made available, it is for management of work and the way of execution task I have at my hand? Or, the standards is for the solution what I finding and implementing for the problem what I have?

    In a way of looking at this, I see, the standards cannot be applied for the solution I'm trying to find for the problem what I have understood. Because, the solution is variant for the reason the problem has got the property of varying.

    If standards is generalized aspect for the subject, more likely it is not feasible to any context. Its essence can be used to monitor the outcome to learn if it is usable and have got reasonable evidences to show what are doing as per the regulatory to get the it approved. This looks for me more of a management work. That indicates me, the art cannot be restricted with standards.

    But, the next question that I get is, do any one of us believe, 'management is an art?' Then, I get the question, 'should standards be applied or exist for management?' Again, it goes to same node of thought for me.

    That is, standard exist to see if my work is usable and is as per any regulatory specifics. But having it mandate to solve the problem at the hands as in case of technology, is not convincing me yet. Same for management I believe. If that was true, then, democracy's Constitution has to define ISO Standards for politics and governance, if management needs to be done or executed in a prescribed way.


Please, do write your comment on the read information. Thank you.