Manual vs Automation: Why You Don’t Have to Pick a Side
Whenever one says “QA” or “software testing,” the first reaction is usually: “So are you manual or automation?” As if you must choose which side you’re on, and it has to be a lifelong commitment, as though it’s a test battle of some sort. But come on — true testing isn’t quite so binary. It […]
QA/Testing
Whenever one says “QA” or “software testing,” the first reaction is usually: “So are you manual or automation?” As if you must choose which side you’re on, and it has to be a lifelong commitment, as though it’s a test battle of some sort. But come on — true testing isn’t quite so binary.
It is not about clicking on some buttons or typing complex scripts. It is about utilizing the correct tool at the correct moment, being familiar with the product thoroughly, and determining the best way of ensuring things get done. That is why assuming it is either manual or automation is not useful.
In fact, it can be more harmful than useful.
The false dilemma: manual versus automation
Manual testing and automation testing aren’t opposites. They work together — and you need both if you really care about good quality.
Automation is an extremely strong instrument. Manual testing is a universal manner of doing things. Difficulty lies where we will want to use one of them for everything. Yes, automatic tests are great for checking things on changes or on simple tests.
Where you’re searching for new problems, inspecting how users interact with an app, or reproducing that bizarre bug that happens only under very specific conditions — say full moon and clicking too fast — manual testing almost always prevails.
When manual matters
Manual testing is not “less serious” or “just for beginners.” It’s actually a way to really understand the product, how it works, and how users experience it.
Manual testing is especially helpful when:
● It is something you’re trying that’s new or not yet stable.
● You wish you knew how you could apply an aspect in everyday situations.
● You’re looking for problems that don’t exist within any test cases.
● You must be able to think like an end user and not like a program.
When automation excels
Automation is really helpful when you need to scale up. As your team gets bigger, more features are added, and releases happen faster, automation keeps everything organized.
It’s super useful for:
● Verifying new changes don’t break anything established
● Confirmation on other devices, configurations, or browsers
● Fast results for the developers
● Connecting with continuous integration and delivery tools
However, something you want to remember: you’re only going to be able to automate things that are consistent and don’t fluctuate very much.
My experience: the power of combining both
In one of my older projects, we automated extensively. Everything seemed fine on the surface — until it was not. A lot of the worst issues were discovered by hand, either through exploratory testing or when testers got creative ideas. That taught us an invaluable lesson: We ought to discuss as a team how we want to automate. We must allow for some manual testing also. But most of all, we shouldn’t rely on one technique over another. It’s all about balance.
Final thoughts
Manual and automation don’t compete against each other. They’re both in the same toolkit. Understanding where and how you’re going to use each one of them makes you an extraordinary tester. Therefore you don’t have to choose one over the other. You must — and can — learn them both. Because quality is not about the tool you’re using. It’s about how you think.
Creating quality software is important to us at Swan Software Solutions. To discover more about how we can help with your QA or other technology needs, schedule a free assessment.
