My attempt of twitterview on Agile Testers with Bob Marshall

It looks like there is a new beast in software development taxonomy, namely Agile Tester. Somehow I missed its emergence, I was sure they are not separate species. Maybe they are. I’m going to investigate this phenomenon, as soon as I’m done with my intellectual debt to people who were so kind to answer my comments on their blogs (Brent, Eric I’m speaking about you here).

My current understanding of “Agile Tester” is pretty much summed up in the following Twitter conversation with Bob Marshall (@flowchainsensei). Apparently, my interviewing skills are lame, and Mr. Marshall got bored pretty quickly. Still, I believe that the chat does touch a couple of important points. By the way, if you didn’t hear about Bob Marshall, you may be missing a lot of fresh ideas that are going to shape future of software development. As Alan Cooper put it: “In the meantime, @flowchainsensei is tweeting up a storm of good stuff. Highly recommended.”

https://twitter.com/#!/flowchainsensei/status/164663599304949761

@kurniliya: How’s that? ->“If you have testers, then you’re not Agile. Calling them Agile Testers does not change this fact.”
@flowchainsensei: I am unsure as to the nature of your question.
@kurniliya: I mean, it’s not an obvious fact, is it? I’d appreciate if you provide arguments, explanation. I.e. go deeper into it.
@flowchainsensei: For example, what does Scrum say about team membership / roles / job titles?
@kurniliya: I see your point, but. 1. Scrum is Agile, Agile is not Scrum. 2. Scrum has distinct ScrumMaster role, why not have Tester?
@flowchainsensei: Agile, as a subset of the Synergistic mindset, invites folks to take a whole-system view of (tech) business. 1/2
@flowchainsensei: Why, then, perpetual the Analytic mindset [cf Ackoff] with siloed roles and responsibilities, and narrow specialisms? 2/2
@kurniliya: Can I say then “If you have programmers/designers/analysts/you-name-it, then you’re not Agile”?
@flowchainsensei: Yes
@kurniliya: Is it direct conclusion from Agile Manifesto, or we deal with evolved definition of Agile? (No probs, just to get context.)
@flowchainsensei: Strongly implicit in Manifesto (and esp. 12 practices), but not explicit.
@kurniliya: “I’m tester” doesn’t mean I can’t code, design, take business POV. Rather “I can and love testing more than anything else”
@flowchainsensei: I’m sure many buggy-whip makers loved making buggy whips, too. Didn’t stop them becoming extinct.
@kurniliya: The car made them extinct, did it? What is “the car” for coding, testing, design?
@flowchainsensei: Lean Product Development (probably), FlowChain. 🙂
@kurniliya: Does Lean let one produce software w/o coding? If not then buggy-whip makers case is *essentially* different.
@flowchainsensei: How so, different?
@kurniliya: No need for horse-stuff-makers, if there are no horses. We need ’em otherwise. Software is still here => we need coders etc
@flowchainsensei: Or AI. Or sw that users can “code”. Or…
@kurniliya: I thought we speak about *present* days 🙂 Or nearest, possible, and desirable future.
@flowchainsensei: Who can tell when/what the next innovation might be?
@kurniliya: If some magic makes everyone ultimately happy tomorrow, I’m ok with that. But can we base arguments on what we know today?
@flowchainsensei: Sure, but erm, that’s not very *agile* is it? 😉
@kurniliya: “Yesterday’s weather” approach by Martin Fowler (can be wrong with ref) is considered agile, AFAIK. Note *yesterday* 😉
@kurniliya: Tiny sidestep: Who can tell *if* the next innovation will be? Strange, how deep we got used to constant innovation.
@flowchainsensei: Nothing in life is certain 🙂

Advertisements
My attempt of twitterview on Agile Testers with Bob Marshall