january 14, 2004 the three r's of software testing © james bullock, brian branagan contact:...

18
January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: [email protected] 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of Software Testing The three r's of Software Testing Discovering the three Discovering the three little r's little r's (Exercise) (Exercise) Building the three Building the three Big Big R's R's (Exercise) (Exercise) Take-Aways and Summary Take-Aways and Summary

Upload: brittney-george

Post on 05-Jan-2016

214 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The three r's of Software TestingThe three r's of Software Testing

Discovering the three Discovering the three little r'slittle r's

(Exercise)(Exercise)

Building the three Building the three BigBig R'sR's

(Exercise)(Exercise)

Take-Aways and SummaryTake-Aways and Summary

Page 2: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The three r's – This SessionThe three r's – This Session

The three r's of Software TestingExperience based insight about people doing testingArticle targeted for Better Software (formerly STQE) or SQPDescribes mood: resignation, resentment, righteousnessShows alternatives moods and how to work with them

Experiential session– You'll get out of it what you put into it

Introductory, exploratory not exhaustiveProvides modes, tools and resources to investigate further

Additional StuffHandouts – Sidebars from the ArticleFeedback – Yes, please. Feedback sheetsContact info, presentation files QA-SIG site

Page 3: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The three r's of Software TestingThe three r's of Software Testing

Discovering the three Discovering the three little r'slittle r's

Page 4: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The Story of the three The Story of the three little rlittle r's's

Brian has an “Out of Brian” ExperienceComes up with “three r's”

resignationresentmentrighteousness

The “three r's” seem universalJim – He (I) was all over this (another story . . . )Resonates with everyone who hears about it

Processes seem to go with the little r'sresignation self-talk, body feeling, language actionsresentment self-talk, focus in time, language actionsrighteousness self-talk, assessments, language actions

Page 5: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

Exercise . . . . What are your Exercise . . . . What are your stories?stories?

Form groupsTell your stories of testing (or dev. or life) gone sideways

Pick examples in these storiesOf resignationOf resentmentOf righteousness

One example per card – mnemonic / keyword(Optional) Process note, how it felt, what happened

Like defect reports – You ought to be good at this

Get the important facts, quick observationsGo for coverage – lots of stories and events

Page 6: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The The little rlittle r's group the 's group the experiencesexperiences

Mantra Body Feeling Speech Act Other

resignation

resentment

righteousness

little r's

Page 7: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

Immediate Take-awaysImmediate Take-aways

Notice how you are doing what you are doing“Mood” - Notice how you feel.“Mantras” - Notice your self-talk.“Speech Acts” - Notice the conversations you have.

Change the processes to change the results.I feel bad (somatic)- Stand up (or sit down, or . . . .)Speech Acts - Have different conversations.Mantras - Talk to yourself differently.

Sidebar (Handout) “Mantras of the three r's (and Three R's)”

Illustrates self-talk, a descriptionProvides something to notice, an indicatorSaying the mantras changes how you respond, an intervention

Models suggest: description, indicator, intervention

Page 8: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The three r's of Software The three r's of Software TestingTesting

Building the Building the Big RBig R's's

Page 9: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

From the From the little rlittle r's to the 's to the Big RBig R's's

Each little r focuses on a kind of thingresignation “My choices don't matter.” . . . about my optionsresentment “Those choices (past & “them”) vs. my choicesrighteousness “They are useless.” . . . about the actors

Pair each with an opposite assessment about the same kind of thing (cleverly named with an “R”)

Resolve “I have choices that matter.”Responsibility “What's the contribution I can make, now?”Respect “The actors are valuable.”

Big R's select processes complementary to the little r's

Page 10: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The The little rlittle r's and 's and Big RBig R's Side by 's Side by SideSide

resignation and Resolve . . . are about your choices right nowresentment and Responsibility . . . select which actions you evaluaterighteousness and Respect . . . are generalizations assessing people

little r's Big R's

resignation Resolve

resentment Responsibility

righteousness Judging Others Respect

Abdicating Choices

Exploring Choices, Making Choices

Judging Others' Actions

Assessing your own Contribution

Valuing Others, Self and Work

Page 11: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

Building among the Building among the little rlittle r's & 's & Big RBig R's's

resignation

righteousness

resentment

Resolve

Respect

Respons-ibility

People generalize (without noticing)People generalize (without noticing)People abstract (without noticing)People abstract (without noticing)

People act based on generalizations (without noticing)People act based on generalizations (without noticing)People move from assessments (descriptions) to processes People move from assessments (descriptions) to processes

(without noticing.)(without noticing.)

The The little r's little r's and and Big R's Big R's help you help you

notice.notice.

Once you notice,Once you notice,you can choose.you can choose.

Page 12: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

Next Exercise . . . back to your Next Exercise . . . back to your storiesstories

Back to your groupsBack to your stories of testing (or etc.) gone sideways

Pick examples in these storiesOf resignation or Resolve (or how you consider alternatives)Of resentment or Responsibility (or which actions you evaluate)Of righteousness or Respect (or generalizations about people)

One example per card – mnemonic / keyword(Optional) Which “r” or “R”(Optional) How can you flip this (r to R or process change)

Like defect reports – You ought to be good at thisGet the important facts, quick observationsLook for common processes & patterns

Page 13: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The The little rlittle r's and 's and Big RBig R's group 's group experiencesexperiences

Mantra Body Feeling Speech Act Other little r's &

Big R's

resignation Resolve

Resentment Responsibility

Righteousness Respect

Page 14: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

Great, so how do I use this stuff?Great, so how do I use this stuff?

The little r's and Big R's go with different processesNotice the assessments by noticing the processChange the assessment to change the processes you use . . . orChange the processes to change the assessment . . . orCombinations

Move around in the matrix (Sesame Street Test)Up and down: Does sitting here resigned fit with my Responsibility?Left and right: Feeling Responsible but talking about what they did.Diagonally: Do the choices I'm considering fit with my Responsibility.

Investigate process modelsUnhelpful processes you seem to favor – lose those.Helpful processes you want to do more of – practice those.

Page 15: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

Take AwaysTake Aways

Notice what you are doingBring your attention to “stealth assessments” you might makeNotice the “stealth generalizations” you might fall into

Notice how you are doing what you are doingSeveral process models (somatic, language, self-talk, others)The article is loaded with examples of these and other types.

Sidebar – Tools You Can UseProvides a cheat sheet of processes from the article

References- Resources to investigate furtherOther take aways?

??

Page 16: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The The three rthree r's of Software 's of Software TestingTesting

The Corporate Powerpoint VersionThe Corporate Powerpoint Version

Ref: The Thinking Style of Power point – Ref: The Thinking Style of Power point – TufteTufte

Page 17: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The The three rthree r's of Software 's of Software Testing, I of IITesting, I of II

Mood matters in software testingBad moods -> Bad BehaviorThree common moods – little r's – in testingresignation, resentment, righteousness

People work themselves into bad moods.Moods build one to anotherTesters are particularly prone to this problemPart of the job, part of the personality

Alternative moods: Three Big R'sResolve, Responsibility, and RespectMultiple techniques and models for swapping moods

Page 18: January 14, 2004 The three r's of Software Testing © James Bullock, Brian Branagan contact: jbullock@rare-bird-ent.com 1 Seattle QA-SIG The three r's of

January 14, 2004

The three r's of Software Testing© James Bullock, Brian Branagan

contact: [email protected]

SeattleQA-SIG

The The Three rThree r's of Software Testing, 's of Software Testing, II of IIII of II

Choose the moods with which you workHow? Watch your behavior for the little r's and Big R's

You can encourage people around you to choose more effective moods

Manager, set context to encourage useful moodsPractices, processes and culture to encourage useful moods

This article and talk can help you identify the little r's and Big R's in your experience. Techniques

Mantras of the little r's and Big R's (Sidebar)Ideas you can use. (Sidebar)Resources for investigation (References)Examples in the article, especially John's story.