The Uselessness and High Cost of Test Management Tools

Introduction

Test management tools are often marketed as essential for organizing and managing test cases, tracking progress, and ensuring quality. However, in practice, these tools can be more of a hindrance than a help. They come with high costs and often fail to deliver the promised benefits.

Root Cause

The primary issue with test management tools is that they are designed to handle manual test cases, which are inherently different from automated tests. This misalignment leads to several problems:

Cons

  1. Redundant Duplication: There is no need to store automated tests in a third-party service because it will be redundant duplication. Testers can get all the needed information from pipeline artifacts, reports, and logs. Developers generally do not like to navigate through endless hierarchies of tests in a third-party service. Product owners might want metrics like coverage and duration, but this information can be obtained from your pipeline and visualized using any office software.
  2. Misalignment with Goals: Test management tools can confuse and divert automation resources from the main goal—covering requirements, not manual test cases. This often leads to the typical mistake of covering manual test cases.
  3. Cost: These tools cost money. While the cost might not be exorbitant, why pay for something unnecessary?
  4. Complexity: These tools often have steep learning curves and require significant time and effort to set up and maintain.
  5. Inefficiency: Instead of streamlining the testing process, test management tools can add unnecessary layers of bureaucracy and slow down the workflow.
  6. Additional Efforts: Supporting the integration of test management tools requires additional efforts.
  7. Data Security: There are concerns about the security of data stored in third-party services.

Pros

While there are significant drawbacks, there are a few potential benefits to using test management tools:

  1. Illusion of Control: Test management tools might give the illusion of control and organization, but this is often superficial and does not translate into real benefits.
  2. Initial Satisfaction: There might be initial satisfaction in having a centralized tool for managing tests, but this is short-lived as the drawbacks become apparent.
  3. Superficial Metrics: You might achieve superficial metrics that look good on reports, but these metrics do not reflect true test coverage or quality.

Solution

To avoid the pitfalls of test management tools, consider the following alternatives:

  1. Cover Specifications, Not Manual Tests: Focus on covering the requirements, not the manual test cases. Details: The Worthlessness of Automating Manual Test Cases.
  2. Keep Tests Small and Focused: Make your automated tests as small and focused as possible. Here I described the issue: The Golden Rule of Automated Testing: Are You Violating It?.
  3. Define Structure and Naming Conventions: Since you will have a lot of atomic checks, it is crucial to define the structure of tests and follow it. The first action is to define responsibility or scope for automated tests. Based on that, define and describe naming conventions. Here are details: Stop Sabotaging Your Tests: The Crucial Role of Naming Conventions. Avoid using generic tags; read more about the issue here: Test Tagging Strategy Without Tags.
  4. Custom Scripts: Develop custom scripts to handle test management and reporting. This approach can be tailored to your specific needs and is often more efficient, e.g., for tracking requirements that were not checked.
  5. Store Requirements in Codebase: Write self-descriptive tests and use version control systems like Git to store your requirements in the codebase. Practical example review here: Integrating Requirements into the Codebase: A Practical Guide with Cypress.

Conclusion

While test management tools promise to streamline and improve the testing process, they often fall short and come with high costs and significant drawbacks. By considering alternative approaches and focusing on lightweight, integrated solutions, teams can achieve better results without the overhead and complexity of traditional test management tools.