Improved transparency of the testing process in the project.
Improved measurability and manageability of the testing process.
Built stable test environments due to more accurate test data.
Achieved independence of development and testing in teams.
Achieved a significant reduction in test time; not only due to the test execution time but also due to the redistribution of testing levels.
Non-functional testing became mandatory for every major release.
This case is a very good example why manual penetration test are valuable – the team achieved compromise without administrator access to the application, not using any known exploits or discovering injection/deserialization/other RCE flaws. The vulnerabilities used could not be discovered by any Web application scanner, as the requests used presented well-documented behavior. We understand the importance of manual testing, and that is why most of our web penetration test project time is dedicated to it.
Average Defect lifetime decreased to 2-3 days.
Test expertise sharing between developers, components testers and system testers led to a synergistic effect in the teams.
The use of more complete and complex test data led to the finding of errors in the early stages (defect costs decreased).
Independent teamwork with the necessary continuous integration significantly accelerated the development and features release.
Customer confidence in project management has been restored
Work with customer expectations and the simultaneous planning of development and testing led to the timely completion of all stages and the project as a whole
The redistribution of roles and the setting up of processes in the tester team led to the emergence of two leaders at the same time: technical lead and test manager
The most important factor that necessitates test automation is the short development cycle. Agile teams have only a few weeks to get a grasp of the requirement, make the code changes, and test the changes. If all testing were to be done manually, the time required would surpass the actual development time. Alternatively, testing would have to be hurried, thus compromising on quality.