automation - QA and testing: a crossing area approach -

i come request of advices, hints, path follow, etc.

the point following. goal develop qa/testing area software company product web application.

as usual there many functional testers ensure application has right quality being released production.

my goal apply strategy helping company grow @ same time number of testers not exponentially. mean if functionality increases natural increase number of testers. want restrict number of manual testers because find not productive should be. know 1 of main human characteristic commit mistakes.

so, straightforward answer implement automation, aware of some/many tools doing , doing so. however, wish go deeper. on 1 hand side these tools oriented final product wish have broader approach focused on quality of each single artifact produced, in other words if each single building block has high quality probability of having high quality on system built combining them going increase. goal apply qa many artifacts different areas of company produces, let say, technical design, implementation/code, may architecture artifacts, etc. , of course whole product.

i have ideas artifacts no idea others. comment or criticism going welcomed.

my plan following

final product: default approach: manual plus automatic testing

code: unit testing combined static analysis

technical design: formal specification languages such tla or event-b

architecture artifats: no idea, knowledge quite short

besides skills needed carrying out, question following:

• do think doable or realistic?
• do think approach can improve quality of product?
• is worth?
• tools consider...

before answer question, preface answer simple statement of fact. have been in software testing industry 20+ years, , more half of time in manual arena.

my goal apply strategy helping company grow @ same time number of testers not exponentially. mean if functionality increases natural increase number of testers. want restrict number of manual testers because find not productive should be. know 1 of main human characteristic commit mistakes.

this wrong! automation meant compliment manual efforts; not replace them. yes, humans make mistakes but, should never prevent having sort of manual testing approach.

so, how can effectively?

• unit tests. yes, these can onerous , annoying developers but, in order test things service layer, or data access layer or business logic layer, these necessary.

• manual tests. have testers write manual test cases. have reviewed developers, product owners, fellow testers. yes, there mistakes , misunderstandings @ times approach manual team decides take but, team should work unit ensure testing has ample coverage scope.

• automated tests. bread-and-butter of post, believe, , passionate about. liked article , 1 well. but, in reality, automation approach dictated team , how work. have qa engineers lean on manual qa team , developers identify best candidate automation , run that.

in terms of tools, subjective thing. me personally, since our company makes web applications, use selenium/java , selenium/c#. results may vary.

edit: forgot mention when posting. not take the, 'this has bug free @ launch' approach. goal cannot achieved.