Debunked: 5 Software Testing Myths That Still Exist in 2024
While there’s plenty of discussion around developing software, there’s far less focus, in my opinion, on the equally important task of improving it.
Today, nearly anyone can dive into software development, especially with tools like ChatGPT making it more accessible than ever. Whether you’re a budding developer or a seasoned pro with countless ideas, there comes a point when the goal should shift from simply creating new software to refining and enhancing what you already have. This improvement process requires gathering information on the software's current state and, most importantly, thoroughly testing it to understand where it can get better.
When it comes to software testing, several myths still persist in the tech world. Many believe that testing slows down development, that it’s only about confirming acceptance criteria, or that it’s too costly. These misconceptions continue to linger, clouding the true value of testing. In today’s post, I’ll dive into six common myths about software testing and explain why each of them misses the mark.
If you're interested in more topics on software testing and ways to enhance software quality, be sure to subscribe to my YouTube channel for regular insights and tips!
https://www.youtube.com/@therealtestify?sub_confirmation=1
1. Testing is Only About Checking the Requirements
So, you’ve reached a point where your software is almost ready for release. Now, it’s time to verify that everything aligns with the requirements, find any lingering bugs, and fix them. But let me be clear—this isn’t testing; it’s what we call “checking.”
Checking is simply confirming that something appears as expected. For example, if the requirement states that a button should be blue, checking means verifying that it is, in fact, blue. It doesn’t bring any new insights because you already know what to expect. True testing, however, goes deeper, exploring unknowns and uncovering issues beyond what’s explicitly defined.
Testing, at its core, is about discovering new information about the product, uncovering unknowns. For instance, consider a field designed to capture age as a number. What happens if a user enters "0," or an unusually large number? What if they type a letter instead, or leave it blank? These scenarios reveal insights that weren’t predefined, and testing explores them to gather valuable data.
With this new information, teams can make informed decisions about whether to make changes or keep things as they are. While this decision-making may involve other team members, as a tester, you play a key role by having a comprehensive understanding of the product’s behavior and potential issues.
Testing goes far beyond simple checking or just hunting for bugs. It's about gathering as much information as possible across various aspects of the product. This is the beauty of testing: it allows you to truly understand a system, uncover its weaknesses, and observe how it behaves under different conditions. Through thorough testing, you gain a comprehensive view of the product, which is invaluable for improving its quality and reliability.
2. Automated Testing Makes Manual Testing Obsolete
This is another common myth, especially among those who haven’t been directly involved in testing: the belief that every test can be automated. With today’s advanced tools - and the growing influence of AI - there are more claims than ever suggesting that machines can replace QA engineers. But the reality is quite different.
Just like the system itself, tests evolve. Every new feature or update can change how the system behaves, sometimes in unexpected ways. Automated tests can detect these shifts, but they aren’t foolproof. A test that once worked perfectly may no longer be accurate after a change, requiring you to rewrite it and ensure it’s still valid each time. This maintenance can reduce the efficiency gains of automation, highlighting that while automation is helpful, it’s not a one-and-done solution.
Automation is—and always will be—just one approach to testing; it’s not a replacement for other types. This holds true for AI as well. Automation should be implemented thoughtfully, with the goal of benefiting the project, not as a blanket replacement for all “manual” testing. If replacing manual testing is your primary goal, it’s time to rethink. Automation requires careful consideration, planning, and alignment with project needs. If you’re interested in diving deeper into this topic, check out my blog post where I explore it further.
Before the First Line of Code: 7 Key Questions for Starting a Test Automation Project
3. Testing Is a Task Exclusively for the Testing Team
This is yet another common myth in the industry. Some companies choose not to hire QA engineers, while others do—but when they do, they often believe that only the QA team should be responsible for testing. In my view, this mindset implies that only QA engineers are responsible for quality, which is far from true. Hiring testers doesn’t guarantee quality; instead, it’s about fostering a quality-focused mindset across the entire company. Quality should be everyone’s responsibility, from developers to stakeholders, to ensure a truly robust product.
To create an excellent product, testing should begin from day one, with everyone on the team playing a role. Is the product owner validating their requirements? Is the developer writing effective unit tests? A tester should maintain an overview of the product's overall quality, but every team member should adopt a mindset focused on identifying and resolving issues. When everyone is committed to finding and fixing bugs, the product becomes stronger and better aligned with user needs.
So, no, testing isn’t solely the tester’s responsibility. It’s an integral part of developing quality software, and it’s achieved only through teamwork, not in isolation. When everyone shares the same mindset, no one feels defensive if a bug is found because the entire team is united in the same goal—a better, more reliable system.
4. Testing Costs Too Much to Be Implemented
Hiring a tester might seem costly at first—after all, you’re paying a salary, and there’s no guarantee they’ll find bugs every time. Many see the cost of QA engineers as directly tied to the number of bugs they uncover. And if they do find issues, fixing them can delay the product launch, adding even more to the budget. However, this perspective misses the larger value that testers bring by helping prevent costly issues from reaching users and ensuring a higher-quality product from the start.
But, of course, this isn’t the reality. The earlier you find a bug, the less costly it is to fix. Numerous resources online demonstrate how production-level bugs lead to significantly higher expenses. Think about it: developers must pause their current work to prioritize and fix the bug, which then requires retesting before it can go live. All of this takes valuable time and resources—not to mention the stress involved. Catching issues early with dedicated QA efforts saves both time and money, ensuring smoother development and a more reliable product.
Testing does come with upfront costs, and it can be challenging to quantify exactly how much money is saved by catching errors early. It’s similar to building a house: if you wait until construction is complete to check for mistakes, fixing them can become very expensive and complicated. By contrast, identifying issues early on prevents costly, complex repairs later. While testing isn’t free, it’s an investment that ultimately saves money by ensuring a smoother development process and a more reliable final product.
5. Testing Pushes Back Project Timelines
In a former company, we were gearing up to release a new software version for one of our products. With time running short, the project manager decided to cut testing early to avoid launch delays. We moved forward with minimal testing, eager to get the product out. But just two days post-launch, the first complaint came in: the software wasn’t working as expected. Soon after, similar reports started pouring in from different countries. Within five days, we identified a compatibility issue affecting various software versions, forcing us to roll back the launch in certain regions. Ultimately, it took an additional four months to address the problem fully and rerelease the update. This experience was a tough reminder of the high cost of skipping thorough testing.
There’s a common myth that testing slows down time-to-market. But just like the misconception about costs, the idea that testing creates delays is simply not true. When testing is done effectively and follows agile principles, it moves in sync with development. Features are broken down into smaller, manageable chunks, allowing QA to provide quick feedback to developers. This way, any issues are addressed promptly, enabling the team to progress swiftly. With the right approach, testing actually accelerates the development process rather than slowing it down.
That’s the theory, of course. In reality, many companies still follow mostly a waterfall approach, postponing testing until the very end. When everything is tested all at once, a flood of bugs and issues often surfaces right before release, creating a rush to fix them. This scramble reinforces the perception that testing is a bottleneck, slowing down the process. However as my earlier example shows, skipping or minimizing testing can end up causing even greater delays in the long run.
Quality should always be the top priority for any software development team. The constant race between time and quality needs to end because, ultimately, customers appreciate well-crafted products—not just the ones that hit the market first. Investing in quality from the start is what builds lasting success. For more on this topic, check out my blog post, where I dive deeper into why quality should come first.
Time vs. Quality: Why we should Rethink Deadlines in Software Development
As you can see, myths about software testing persist, especially among those who haven’t worked directly in the field. Testing has always been and will continue to be one of the cornerstones of high-quality software. For anyone who still holds onto these myths, it’s time for a mindset shift and truly understand the value of testing. If you know of any additional myths, I’d love to hear about them in the comments!