Monday 28 September 2009 - "Skilled" tester - do you know what it is? |
Gil Bloom posted the following question on linkedin: "Skilled" tester - do you know what it is? Is there a definition or a way to define it? Apparently it is not that obvious. I was challenged during a discussion with a (known) expert to define or explain what is a "skilled" tester. According to him, most of us don't know how to do it and rely on certifications, which (to his view) are worthless. So, who is a "professional" or "skilled" tester? Is it to do with work experience? Academic knowledge? Certifications? Combination of them? Should we link it to a specific project/job and only then answer it? I thought to open it to an online discussion, seeing how interesting it was for those who participated so far offline.
It's in the 'Software Testing & Quality Assurance' group.
My comment following:
I don't quite agree with your expert that certification is worthless however I will say that being certified does not make you a tester, either skilled or unskilled. It just means you can memorise sections of a book. Certification should hopefully give you fuel to continue your own experience, development and learning to become a skilled or unskilled tester. Some people will continue down that path regardless of Certification. Getting a driving licence doesn't mean you are automatically a good driver, doesn't mean you are bad either but for most people more time on the road will make them better. I think being a skilled tester comes down to natural ability, experience and a want/need to develop yourself. You have to be a questioner however you also have to ask the right questions, and so have to learn what questions need asking and when and also when the answers need questioning. And yes, some different projects/jobs require different skills, some will be transferable of course, it depends on the tester and the project/job. The skills should probably be defined though as different testers have different testing skills, technical skills and soft skills. This doesn't just count for testers though, it's the same for all jobs. Take two lawyers with the same education and similar experience will they be the same? Probably not, it'll come down to natural ability, what they've actually done with their experience and their own skillset. I think that defining what a (general) skilled tester is near impossible as there are too many variables stemming from what you actually need from the tester. That's a lot of writing, I haven't even had a coffee yet! Later I'll probably re-read what I wrote and decide to change it. |
|
Monday 5 October 2009 - Skilled Tester- http://www.sqablogs.com/tonybruce/2463/ |
| Posted by rajeshmathur |
| Agreed! A certification does not make a skilled tester. It is some natural ability, some acquired or earned. As you rightly said, all you have to do is just go through some portions of teh book, cram them, appear for teh exam and lo!, you are a certified tester. Most do not even think what value they are getting out of that, apart from an additional point for their resumes. |
| Permanent Link |
Tuesday 15 December 2009 - Questions questions questions |
| Posted by Anonymous |
This is the best part of the blog. You have to be a questioner however you also have to ask the right questions, and so have to learn what questions need asking and when and also when the answers need questioning. If you can ask the right questions at the time - you've got it made.
Good job - loved it. |
| Permanent Link |
Thursday 17 December 2009 - Certifications are not useless |
| Posted by Anonymous |
| Being a skilled tester is the job of the person in the role and finding a skilled tester is the job of the recruiter. If thorough enough, the recruitment process should be enough to find the right person with the right skill set. With regards to certifications and qualifications, tech guys need to brush up on some economics. Qualifications (inc certifications of any sort) are a signalling mechanism which says that the holder is effective enough to accept information, process, retain and demonstrate understanding. Generally this is what employers want since most will provide role and job specific training (ie, can you learn how to do the job in my company?). Qualifications demonstrate this with non-job-specific training (eg, how to test, how to program Java, etc). The general idea is that clever/talented/skilled people find it easier to pass exams than not-so-clever/skilled people so qualifications are a proxy on how talented you are. Extrapolating: the more talented you are, the more qualifications you have and the industry caters for this: ISEB foundation/intermediate/practitioner or ISTQB foundation/advanced/expert. If you disagree, how is it that every tester has not passed all the exams? Surely it cannot be the money for exam fees (approx gbp 150 per exam), or the time (1 day per exam), thus it must be talent. If I could do it I would gladly pay gbp 600 and take four days out of my free time in exchange for all the ISEB qualifications on my CV, and then I would do the same for the ISTQB, or maybe a few solid years for a PhD. It is not that simple because I have to study and pass the exams. In short, certifications are a good idea and it is progress that companies are using them as benchmarks. The race to the top of the ISEB/ISTQB qualification tree starts now my friends (aka job hunting competitors). Stand out from the other testers, get another qualification. And read some economics. |
| Permanent Link |
|
About Me
A place for me to write about testing and tested related things. Occasionally general items will sneak in but that's life.
Friends
• philk10
• jimtest
• PeteNairn
• strazzerj
|
