I guess it’s that time again.  What time is that, you ask?  It’s the time when discussion/debate flares up over Context-Driven. I’m not going to weigh in on the whole discussion of pros/cons, value/distraction, etc.  I am a consultant.  I am Context-Driven (and not just as a tester, it's simply the way I have operated since long before I was a tester and long before I became aware someone had coined a term and composed a set of principles around how I already operated).  The license plate on my car says “CONTEXT”. It works for me.  But my point isn’t to convince you that it’s right for you.  My point is to address a comment that I frequently hear that *feels* very sad to me.

“Where I work, I don’t have the freedom or authority to implement all this Context-Driven stuff, so I guess I don’t get to be part of the club.”

I find this sad, because I don’t agree.  It is my opinion that “Where I work, I don’t have the freedom or authority…” *is* a "driving context", making smart decisions about what you are empowered to choose, and appropriately trying to inform/educate those who are "driving your context" that there are other options qualifies as being Context-Driven... at least to me.

It is a type of testing I had never imagined, testing pronounciation and even patience. If you were recording voiceovers with a celebrity voice who hadn’t done it before, how would you correct them if they mispronounced something? You could send them a checklist perhaps beforehand.

What if they were intimidating and known for their short temper and meglomaniacal tendencies? A famous celebrity recently was recording a GPS voice over, and was saying “roundabound” not “roundabout”. Luckily a tape of the incident has been released and is now being watched around the galaxy…..

They may have even more problems later when they try the same thing with a linguistically challenged little green man ...

I was pleased to see Michael Bolton's series on Testing vs. Checking. If you haven't been following, what I consider to be the central thread of the topic (and the unfortunately inevitable fallout that seems to happen in "testerland" almost any time someone says something that makes sense).

From Michael:

• http://www.developsense.com/2009/08/testing-vs-checking.html
• http://www.developsense.com/2009/09/transpection-and-three-elements-of.html
• http://www.developsense.com/2009/09/pass-vs-fail-vs-is-there-problem-here.html
• http://www.developsense.com/2009/09/elements-of-testing-and-checking.html

From James Bach:

• http://www.satisfice.com/blog/archives/358

From Scott Barber:

• http://www.perftestplus.com/resources/014PeakPerf.pdf Original, ST&P Magazine, 2005
• http://www.logigear.com/newsletter/investigation_vs_validation.asp Reprinted by Logigear, 2007

Wired.com ran their smart list today. If you aren't familiar with it or don't care, at least check out the great press fellow software tester, entrepreneur, and social innovator Thorkil Sonne is getting for Specialisterne here:

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-10/ff_smartlist_sonne

The 4th Annual Conference of the Association of Software Testing (CAST) 2009

Colorado Springs, Colorado, July 13-16, 2009

Serving Our Stakeholders

Opening Keynote by: Dr. Jonathan Koomey

Closing Keynote by: Robert Sabourin & Tim Coulter

Invited Speakers: Mike Dwyer and Kevin Brennan

The 4th Annual Conference of the Association of Software Testing (CAST) 2009

Colorado Springs, Colorado, July 13-16, 2009

Serving Our Stakeholders

Opening Keynote by: Dr. Jonathan Koomey

Closing Keynote by: Robert Sabourin & Tim Coulter

Invited Speakers: Mike Dwyer and Kevin Brennan

No further commentary needed.

--

Scott Barber

President & Chief Technologist, PerfTestPlus, Inc.