June 4, 2024 • 30 mins
Welcome to another episode of Testing Experts with Opinions, your go-to podcast for conversations about trends, tools, and technology in the software testing space. In this episode, we dive into a topic that often sparks debate: the ISTQB certification.
Our panel of experts discusses the merits and drawbacks of obtaining an ISTQB certification, particularly at the foundation level. Is it just a theoretical exercise, or does it offer real-world value? We explore how the certification can be beneficial for newcomers and seasoned professionals alike, while also considering its impact on career advancement and the recruitment process.
We also touch on the broader implications for the industry, including whether there should be more accessible, high-quality testing education available to everyone, regardless of their financial situation. Our experts share their personal experiences and insights, making a case for why having a standardized certification like ISTQB can be a valuable asset in the software testing community.
Tune in to hear their thoughts and join the conversation on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok. Let's explore the evolving landscape of software testing together!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Welcome to Testing Experts with Opinions, an inspired testing podcast aimed
at creating conversations about trends, tools, and technology in the software
testing space. Welcome to another podcast.
I'm going to stop saying this is our fourth or fifth or fifth or sixth or tenth
one because I think I actually got it wrong last week.
(00:21):
I think I said it was the sixth and it was the fifth. So, yeah,
we're going to be discussing something today which often comes up in conversations.
And sometimes when we speak to clients, they ask about it.
And it's around ISTQB and the, I guess, merits or benefits, the pros and cons
(00:47):
of having it versus not having it.
I know that there are strong opinions in the community.
And I watch a lot of videos on YouTube where you have these people in the US
giving financial advice, but then stating this is not financial advice.
And I almost want to say that today, to say this is our opinion,
(01:09):
but it's not our official opinion.
It's going to be a conversation based on our own feelings and opinions.
So I think let's get started. it
let's who can
i go to first stefan let's go to you first what what
is what is your opinion on okay
(01:30):
let me first state this so when we talk about istqb i mean it's branched out
massively and you now have a lot of specialization uh courses you have the advanced
courses in terms of the test manager,
you obviously have the agile courses, et cetera.
(01:50):
So maybe let's initially talk about the foundation level because that is the
prerequisite for any of those additional courses.
And maybe let's talk about the merits or the pros, cons, benefits of achieving
that and whether we feel it's necessary.
So, Stefan, just in terms of your experience, Do you believe it's beneficial or not?
(02:17):
And I guess why?
I do think it's beneficial i think for many years now i think specifically in our industry,
is a lack of of of certifications and and formal education in terms of software testing and i
think icgba has filled that gap for many years and i think there's definitely
(02:38):
a place even if it's just on the theoretical side having one version of truth
globally that people can,
relate to or refer to in terms of what terminology to
use in the world of testing and and core testing
concepts i think it definitely has its place in the
theory sense but i guess and that that's not specific to ios tkb i think in
(03:02):
any kind of certification many times it's purely just theoretical the real value
just because you have any certification doesn't make make an expert in And that
can be for an engineer or a doctor or anything, I guess.
I think it is how you apply that knowledge that you get out of the certification.
I think people have sometimes said it's not necessarily or they don't think
(03:22):
it's a good certification because now somebody has done the course, but they still contest.
But that's not the course's fault. It's the person potentially that didn't apply
it correctly. But the theory, I think, is still solid.
So yeah, I think in getting that baseline globally across the testing community,
it definitely has a solid place and not only terminology, but in terms of standards
(03:45):
and processes as well. So I think it's definitely good.
And I think it's become the de facto thing that people look at if they want
some kind of sense of security on a CV, they do look for ISTIC-EB foundation.
And I don't think that'll change in the near future.
So So, yes, and the short answer to it is I think, yes, there is a place for it.
(04:05):
And you can see it. I mean, it hasn't become stale. I haven't looked on the
ISTQB website for a while, and I was surprised, like you mentioned,
how many additional specialist courses there are.
And it shows that there's a need, and they're keeping up to date with the current
market and the way that testing is involving.
So I think it's still alive and kicking, and I don't think it's going anywhere.
(04:26):
Okay, awesome. Awesome. Yeah, you alluded to it and I just want to reiterate,
there is no other de facto or default or I guess industry recognized one.
I guess ISTQB is the only one.
And I was doing some research yesterday just to look at whether there are universities
(04:50):
yet offering degrees in software testing.
Because it feels to me like that's maybe the next step.
And the only thing I could find was actually software engineering degrees with a focus on testing.
And I wonder whether, I mean, I don't think any of you sat at school or university
(05:13):
planning to become a tester one day.
And I often wonder to myself whether that's actually changed with the youth today.
Are there actually people sitting at school or university with the idea of becoming a tester?
There and does istqb actually
give you a really good first step because there's
(05:33):
nothing else it gives at least brings structure
it like you said it it brings a
a common i guess glossary in terms of of
terms and and and and that
type of thing a common understanding regardless of whether
you're whatever language you're talking so from
that perspective there's there's massive of benefits i think just
(05:55):
see um amatla you you want to to
say something oh yes i would say prior
to istqb i don't think there was like a standard software testing process so
that was brought about by istqb and then like now following up to testing being
(06:17):
taught in universities myself having studied studied computer science.
I did coding, but there was no portion like a module to teach you about software testing.
And we have seen like now recently with our new interns, the new intake.
So they were being exposed to testing in the job market.
(06:40):
So I think there's some opportunities
for universities to consider software testing either as a degree or in one of
the modules or as one of the modules in the overall computer science degree
yeah i'm just gonna agree just both points earlier from like there's no,
(07:04):
so i do i do engagement in schools i'm talking to cultural then about my job
and stuff and they are like how do i become a tester and i can never go.
You should do these things and then do these courses i was
like nearly every test i've ever spoken to has ended up
in testing due to chance circumstance
that all they just have a passion for it and they just ended up
(07:24):
doing it and i guess isdqb gives you i can
start an entry route to get you into the
profession but it exists i
guess because like you said there is a gap in the market in terms of if
i wanted to be a developer i won't struggle to find a course on development
i will find i should find a degree that teaches me how to do that in any profession
i don't think you would struggle to find an university level course or qualification
(07:48):
to get you into that entry level it's strange that testing doesn't have that so i guess the istqb is,
come in because there is the absence of kind of accredited professional qualifications,
and it's had to it's become out of a necessity more than than anything else
but i think it is It's valuable because nothing else really exists.
There's no single point that you can talk to somebody, at least at a common
(08:10):
level, that they understand what testing is.
Yeah, just on the topic of ISTQB and education around testing, TMAP exists.
TMAP is a very good certification that is a little bit more practical.
But to your point, Steve, it's not as universally adopted, I suppose, than ISTQB would be.
(08:30):
But TMAP does exist, which helps. helps and then if you look at software engineering
degree specifically would i would i advocate for a testing specific degree probably
not as much as i said maybe a module within that because quality engineering
forms part of the whole software engineering,
life cycle anyway so i don't think spending three years on testing in university,
(08:54):
you're going to be it's going to be tricky creating curriculum for that but
as part of a an engineering degree or a software engineering degree, absolutely.
And do you, okay, so based on everyone's opinions, everyone feels it's a good idea.
It's worth having a foundation level ISTQB.
(09:15):
Okay, no, Jan, you're disagreeing. No, I agree with Stefan that it is good.
I think we as a tasting community should just recognize or realize what it gives you, right?
So I'm not saying it's a bad thing. we have
to be realistic of what you can and cannot do once you
have that so i think at some stage the testing community put
(09:35):
start to put too much emphasis on it and
maybe too little at the moment but it's it's because we
don't really understand the place of istqb and as
stefan as you said with with any learning if you
take two days to learn something you need to realize
that you've only spent two days and and
with respect it's a glossary of terms what what
(09:57):
do you call this what do you call that why do you call that and that's all you've done
for two days because you can for icgb you can spend two days
and write the exam on day three a lot of courses in south africa offers that
so you had two days learning words and that's
good because it gives you fundamental foundational appreciation of those words
and what they mean but that's all it is it does not make you something just
(10:17):
as you said any lawyer or any doctor would so again if i take two days and i
read a pilot's manual will they let me fly a plane now so well you're not even
and getting close to the airport.
And that's the same thing with the ISTQB. So yes, you understand the foundational
terms and you can, when someone speaks about it, yeah, that's it.
But that is all it gives you.
And if we recognize its place in the software world, I think then there is value
(10:43):
in it because at least we all speak the same language.
Yeah agreed and i was you know like is it
always useful to do it and i'll go down because i'm a context person
it depends if if you've been a tester for six to ten years and you're now a
senior lead running a team of 12 testers you probably don't need the foundation
course it's probably not going to add much in terms of value to you if you're
(11:06):
brand new into the profession you're straight out of university you're thinking
i'd like to know a little bit more about testing.
Certainly so or even if you've been doing for two or three years i think it
has it certainly has value but i don't think it's it really depends on your
career path and the eclectic nature of how testers get into the profession and
i think that's maybe the the,
problem with it like you've said of where does it sit in the grand scheme of
(11:29):
things it's not like other professions where if i wanted to be a doctor okay
i have to do this degree i have to go to this college i have to gain i have
to pass the bar if i'm a lawyer or something and now i'm accredited,
I don't think it carries the same weight or something like that because it's
only a smaller course right but I think it's it could maybe help
form part of what what that is yeah so
(11:50):
in my opinion if I have a candidate with five years of five years of experience
in testing and they do not hold an ISTQB certificate and then I have a candidate
with no testing experience and they They hold an ISTQB certificate.
I'll go with a tester that has more experience.
(12:12):
But what we are seeing now is that recruiters are putting so much emphasis on
the certificate, and then we end up losing very skilled candidates.
Yeah, I agree with that, Mamatla. Just coming back to one of the previous points,
Stefan, it's also about what we do with it.
And I was a TACE in the Netherlands, a TACE analyst. And my test manager forced
(12:37):
us, and maybe that's a good habit, of when I write a test case,
telling him what the test design technique was that I used to write that test case.
Now, it sounds silly, but it started forcing me to think about all the things
that I've learned in this ISTQB and now trying to apply it.
You made the comment of if you don't apply these things, it's pointless.
And that test manager actually forced me to say, yes, boundary value analysis
(13:00):
or whatever the case, partitioning. And then through that, I could refer back
to my learnings in the ISTQB and expand my test coverage that way.
But that's a practical way of forcing your team in inverted commas to actually apply that.
And once you start applying those things, then that reference manual is a good thing.
Because then you can refer back to it and say, oh, which design techniques are important?
(13:22):
So having a standardized place for these things is a good thing if you use it
and you start referring back to it.
Yeah, that's a really good point. That's maybe the kind of thing of my journey
into it. I did my STQB maybe like a year and a half into testing or something like that.
And then, oh, that's what I'm doing, black box testing techniques.
I didn't know that's what that was. I knew that's what I was meant to be doing,
(13:43):
but then that's what the name of it was or that phase of testing follows that phase.
I was just naturally following what was in front of me in the project.
It provides a context. It gives you that holistic view, which you don't really have.
You don't realize you're doing it. and that costed help
with that for sure yeah it's a really good point so one of the i guess one of
(14:04):
the critiques of istqb is often that it's too theoretical it's very theoretical
and you can have your istqb and it's not necessarily going to make you a good
tester do you feel that the.
Istqb foundation certificate prepares testers
well enough to actually be able to
(14:26):
deal with those real world scenarios and real world
challenges that they're going to encounter at their companies i would
say yes but not on its own it needs to be paired with somebody if if let's say
a new tester and they do that let's say they're brand new they do the icgb pairing
that with a senior test analyst or a lead helping them to show in a real world
(14:47):
how do you actually apply that like john said okay you've learned about black
box testing but here's a real scenario.
Where you could apply it or you know to understand or differentiate what type you should apply to
different scenarios that you need that human element that guidance
so but it is very good to have that
to at least ask you know i read about these types of testing are
you doing it or you know can have you thought about it or identify it you know
(15:11):
it's that reference point i think that's that's super important so yes but not
on its own is my answer and i think it helps more with the the technical aspect
like the nuts and bolts the mechanical nature of testing,
then it does some of the more business related practical implications so knowing
(15:31):
that i have to get make sure i've got my entry and exit criteria all defined
and signed off before i move phases,
that's great like i can now apply that theoretical learning into a practical
scenario but it can't help you with projects a product owner says i just want
to go live i don't care that you found that there's nothing in there i think
it could be for how do i do with that how
(15:53):
do I sell the value of testing back into something back into someone who doesn't understand it?
Cause the people that you're working with will have not done testing,
know about testing themselves.
So I don't think it equips you for those kinds of interactions. I would say.
Yeah, I think also, I also agree that, you know, ISTQB is very theoretical.
(16:16):
I think it's because of the fact that the body that offers the certification
does not have maybe like the facilities for learners to do practicals.
So maybe if there's collaboration between ISTQB and the universities,
then the universities will provide a setting for people to be able to,
(16:39):
you know, use that theory in real scenarios.
I really like that. I really like that, Mamatla.
If we are saying that it has to form part or we want it to form part of software
engineering, maybe that is a good place to start with that theory in a classroom
(17:00):
environment. So I like that point.
I think the sad thing is, I guess, how much emphasis has been put on having an ISTQB.
So I was just thinking, If any of you didn't have an ISTQB and there was a job
on LinkedIn that you had applied for, there's a very good chance that whoever's
(17:21):
filtering all of those applicants on the other side maybe has a keyword to check for ISTQB.
Now, you're getting ruled out because you don't have your ISTQB.
You might actually be the strongest candidate and the best candidate there,
but just because you don't have that, you may be not even getting seen.
And my question around that is,
is there an over-reliance or too much emphasis put on having an ISTQB as a company
(17:51):
or a recruitment agency or whoever?
Leon, I think the answer may be yes or no, I'm not sure, maybe a bit too much,
but my short answer is just get it and then it's not a concern. It's two days.
A lot of companies are actually saying we'll pay for you to go do the certification.
Like you said, it's two days of training, one day of writing it to eliminate that.
(18:15):
Uncertainty just get it i mean it's i'm looking at
how many there's so many courses on icgb the only
thing people are really worried about is the foundation not the others so
just do it i mean i'm saying just do it i know there's a financial and
a time thing but maybe a bit controversial but i'm sure
if you are talking to an employer and you don't have
it it would be strange almost if they wouldn't support
(18:37):
you in getting that certification and anything
over and above i would think is a bonus but i haven't seen many so sorry steve
i haven't seen many other cvs that they as met as a mandatory ictp certification
is over and above the foundation maybe test manager year and if it's a very
senior role but the others are all over and above in my opinion,
(18:58):
i was just going to play devil's advocate and that like yeah why don't just do it,
what happens if you're you're right at the beginning of your journey you've
got a big ton of student debt and you know okay now i have to spend i don't
know a thousand pound or whatever it is on the course and the qualification
and i've just finished my degree why do i now just go and do another qualification
(19:19):
that wasn't in my degree sure my degree is strong enough,
so i just applied as advocate and i think in those scenarios i think that the
reason why it's why people will ask for it as mandatory is because you might
have people in recruitment that haven't liaised with the testers in their organization
to say it's great if they have
ICTQB but it's not the be-all and end-all it doesn't need to be mandatory it's a nice to have.
(19:43):
It's not a mandatory thing so I think it's mandatory because a lot
of recruitment agencies and recruiters don't aren't testers
I haven't spoken to the testing community about it and I think that the community
is pretty split on whether how how mandatory is it and that's maybe why it goes
the way it does yeah I think for me if you are a lead that is going to onboard
(20:04):
bought somebody with no testing experience and no ISTQB.
It's so time consuming to upskill that person because you first have to start with the terminology.
You first have to start with making them understand the process.
So I think, yeah, if you don't have any experience in software testing,
(20:25):
I guess that will be a good start.
If you have experience and, you know,
like for a recruiter, we will say like, you shouldn't disqualify people if they
don't have their certifications and they have experience but from a person who's
going to onboard a junior with no testing OISTQB certification is very difficult.
(20:48):
Steve to go back to your point around not everyone comes from the same financial situation,
some people may struggle some people may not actually have
the cost to to do an istqb foundation do you
think we as an industry should be doing more to ensure that there is high quality
testing education accessible to everyone regardless of your of your financial
(21:12):
situation yeah but But I would expand it to if we talk about quality,
not just in engineering, but quality as a practice,
and that everyone, even at a primary, secondary school, college,
should have an understanding of the importance of quality in any industry that you go into.
(21:33):
And having that foundational background would be maybe more helpful than skewing
it to everyone needs to have an understanding of testing.
Thing maybe if you're doing computer science skewing it
i'd certainly make it like a mandatory module to talk
about but i think in general a lot of industries would
really benefit from people having an appreciation for quality management in
their systems and how that would impact the wider society i think it's a good
(21:56):
idea i don't know who wants to answer this one but have you noticed any significant
differences in career advancement opportunities for people who have
an ISTQB versus not have an ISTQB.
To the foundation? Sorry, I was just asking if it's specific to foundation.
Yeah, let's talk about just foundation.
(22:17):
I think as soon as you start looking at the more advanced levels,
I think that answer becomes yes.
Because if you have two people with the same sort of experience and the same,
I guess, background, but one person has an advanced level test manager role,
test manager certification, the other one doesn't.
(22:38):
I think that becomes more of a factor.
But just in terms of ISTQB Foundation, have you seen a clear,
I guess a significant career opportunity.
I guess, yeah, career opportunities for people with ISTQB versus now? I definitely haven't.
(23:02):
I think beyond getting you an initial foot in the door with the foundation, I don't believe so.
So I don't think I've never come across someone who's got head of QA position
because they've got test managers qualification and they're going,
oh, that's the final piece of the puzzle that now means you can be head of QA.
It's more likely that they've done six to 12 years of testing experience across
(23:22):
five different industries and managed teams of 30, 40 people.
Then he added a course that took me a week or two weeks or how long that course is.
I think, yeah, I think it's maybe the value stream is lessened as you go deeper into it.
But yeah that's just my personal experience okay so i think let's wrap this
up but i have one final question which is you've all obtained your istqbs what what is the one thing,
(23:50):
i'm sure there'll be more than one thing but maybe what is what is the one main
thing that you've taken from your istqb certification that you may be still
used today so is there one One thing from the foundation certification that you still use today,
consider when you're doing testing, consider when you're giving advice.
(24:11):
Think the one one thing that stands out is the
concept of entrance and exit criteria i think that's definitely something that
i always fall back and in any conversation even on in senior level conversations
is that you consider things when you before you accept it and that you consider
certain criteria before you
send it on so i think that concept to me has stuck yeah i was just gonna.
(24:33):
I'm skewed so i'm quite kind of process process and documentation i kind of quite like,
so for me is recognizing that and this will probably upset some agile people in the room,
is that i've never seen a project that has made that's been made worse by adding
extra documentation it's very rare it's normally the other end of the ball cave
(24:54):
which is we haven't got any documentation on how to do things and it's led to
poorer outcomes and the icdb does kind of,
favor a more structured and documented approach but that's pretty
kind of just appealing to my nature i think more than anything else more
than best practice i i think
for me i mean maybe this is just top of mind
because we did a internal company presentation that they're on
(25:16):
testing types and it's always like go
back to icb because i've got all the documentation and it was
actually quite interesting when we built a mind map about all the testing types
that they've defined and slots into each other it creates
clarity in a very potentially confusing world
with different different terminologies and how does this one relate to that
one and when we built it out visually although it's more theoretical and
(25:36):
text text heavy and like converted that into
a visual presentation it does help a lot in the world of testing to understand
how the different testing types fits into each other and how you separate them
and how they can collaborate or work together to to probably test your software
so in terms of me testing types you know that was quite a good one.
(25:58):
Yeah, for me, I would say requirements analysis, because if we can prevent defects
before they get introduced to code, I think I find that valuable.
And then also it just shows that quality, like testing does not just start with,
you know, dynamic testing.
(26:20):
Testing, static analysis is also very important because people have this misconception
that now with testing, after we have written code, then we hand it over to the testers to test.
Whereas with static analysis from ISTQB, it teaches you that testing is actually
part of the entire software development lifecycle.
(26:42):
So if I remember correctly, I think I did my foundation either in 2002 or 2004.
So let's assume that's 20 years. And there's still two things that stick with me.
And when I think about ISTQB, those are the first things that come up.
And that's boundary value analysis and equivalence partitioning.
That to me is what sums up ISTQB.
(27:05):
I don't know why those two specific things stuck with me. But when I think of
ISTQB, that's always the first thing that comes to mind.
Okay, so just as a summary. So if I was to say we all agree that there is definite
value in ISTQB, the foundation level, it brings good structure to how – well, not structure.
(27:28):
I guess it structures testing into
a good curriculum in terms of covering everything in terms of the basics.
It gives you that base level of what testing is about.
It covers everything around test processes and test types, et cetera.
And it's probably a good idea for someone that starts out.
(27:50):
On their testing career journey to actually undertake a foundation level,
try and get that certification.
But even if you're already fairly experienced, it may have less practical value.
But maybe from a applying for jobs in future perspective, it might be a good
(28:13):
thing to get it on your CV.
So I think it was Stefan that said it's only two days or three days.
So rather make that effort and get it behind your name, even if you don't necessarily
agree with it or necessarily think that it will bring value.
And then the other thing, obviously, is go and look at the ISTQB website because
(28:33):
there's actually a lot of different courses once you've obtained your foundation level.
That's the prerequisite for all of the advanced courses and the specializations.
But there's honestly, there are a lot of courses. And I only just realized earlier
today that the ICTQB was only created in 1998.
(28:53):
So it's only been going for sort of 26 years.
It's a long time, but they've also, they've expanded massively over the last
couple of years in terms of their offerings.
So I think they're moving in the right direction.
Mamatla, you made a good point about the practical. It's difficult to actually
give people that practical knowledge and practical experience.
(29:15):
We have that same challenge internally when we have our interns that complete
their training and we have to try and find practical exercises,
practical situations for them to actually try and apply what they've learned.
So I think ISTQB is always going to suffer, I guess, that pointed remark that
(29:36):
it's too theoretical, it's not practical enough.
But I think you need to take that theory and try and find situations in your
career to actually apply what you've learned practically.
Any closing remarks other than maybe it's a good idea to get your foundation level?
(29:59):
And a better idea to start using and applying it. Agreed. This has been an episode
of Testing Experts with Opinions, an inspired testing podcast.
Find us on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok,
where we're driving conversations.
Welcome to Testing Experts with Opinions, an inspired testing podcast aimed
at creating conversations about trends, tools, and technology in the software
testing space. Welcome to another podcast.
I'm going to stop saying this is our fourth or fifth or fifth or sixth or tenth
one because I think I actually got it wrong last week.
(00:21):
I think I said it was the sixth and it was the fifth. So, yeah,
we're going to be discussing something today which often comes up in conversations.
And sometimes when we speak to clients, they ask about it.
And it's around ISTQB and the, I guess, merits or benefits, the pros and cons
(00:47):
of having it versus not having it.
I know that there are strong opinions in the community.
And I watch a lot of videos on YouTube where you have these people in the US
giving financial advice, but then stating this is not financial advice.
And I almost want to say that today, to say this is our opinion,
(01:09):
but it's not our official opinion.
It's going to be a conversation based on our own feelings and opinions.
So I think let's get started. it
let's who can
i go to first stefan let's go to you first what what
is what is your opinion on okay
(01:30):
let me first state this so when we talk about istqb i mean it's branched out
massively and you now have a lot of specialization uh courses you have the advanced
courses in terms of the test manager,
you obviously have the agile courses, et cetera.
(01:50):
So maybe let's initially talk about the foundation level because that is the
prerequisite for any of those additional courses.
And maybe let's talk about the merits or the pros, cons, benefits of achieving
that and whether we feel it's necessary.
So, Stefan, just in terms of your experience, Do you believe it's beneficial or not?
(02:17):
And I guess why?
I do think it's beneficial i think for many years now i think specifically in our industry,
is a lack of of of certifications and and formal education in terms of software testing and i
think icgba has filled that gap for many years and i think there's definitely
(02:38):
a place even if it's just on the theoretical side having one version of truth
globally that people can,
relate to or refer to in terms of what terminology to
use in the world of testing and and core testing
concepts i think it definitely has its place in the
theory sense but i guess and that that's not specific to ios tkb i think in
(03:02):
any kind of certification many times it's purely just theoretical the real value
just because you have any certification doesn't make make an expert in And that
can be for an engineer or a doctor or anything, I guess.
I think it is how you apply that knowledge that you get out of the certification.
I think people have sometimes said it's not necessarily or they don't think
(03:22):
it's a good certification because now somebody has done the course, but they still contest.
But that's not the course's fault. It's the person potentially that didn't apply
it correctly. But the theory, I think, is still solid.
So yeah, I think in getting that baseline globally across the testing community,
it definitely has a solid place and not only terminology, but in terms of standards
(03:45):
and processes as well. So I think it's definitely good.
And I think it's become the de facto thing that people look at if they want
some kind of sense of security on a CV, they do look for ISTIC-EB foundation.
And I don't think that'll change in the near future.
So So, yes, and the short answer to it is I think, yes, there is a place for it.
(04:05):
And you can see it. I mean, it hasn't become stale. I haven't looked on the
ISTQB website for a while, and I was surprised, like you mentioned,
how many additional specialist courses there are.
And it shows that there's a need, and they're keeping up to date with the current
market and the way that testing is involving.
So I think it's still alive and kicking, and I don't think it's going anywhere.
(04:26):
Okay, awesome. Awesome. Yeah, you alluded to it and I just want to reiterate,
there is no other de facto or default or I guess industry recognized one.
I guess ISTQB is the only one.
And I was doing some research yesterday just to look at whether there are universities
(04:50):
yet offering degrees in software testing.
Because it feels to me like that's maybe the next step.
And the only thing I could find was actually software engineering degrees with a focus on testing.
And I wonder whether, I mean, I don't think any of you sat at school or university
(05:13):
planning to become a tester one day.
And I often wonder to myself whether that's actually changed with the youth today.
Are there actually people sitting at school or university with the idea of becoming a tester?
There and does istqb actually
give you a really good first step because there's
(05:33):
nothing else it gives at least brings structure
it like you said it it brings a
a common i guess glossary in terms of of
terms and and and and that
type of thing a common understanding regardless of whether
you're whatever language you're talking so from
that perspective there's there's massive of benefits i think just
(05:55):
see um amatla you you want to to
say something oh yes i would say prior
to istqb i don't think there was like a standard software testing process so
that was brought about by istqb and then like now following up to testing being
(06:17):
taught in universities myself having studied studied computer science.
I did coding, but there was no portion like a module to teach you about software testing.
And we have seen like now recently with our new interns, the new intake.
So they were being exposed to testing in the job market.
(06:40):
So I think there's some opportunities
for universities to consider software testing either as a degree or in one of
the modules or as one of the modules in the overall computer science degree
yeah i'm just gonna agree just both points earlier from like there's no,
(07:04):
so i do i do engagement in schools i'm talking to cultural then about my job
and stuff and they are like how do i become a tester and i can never go.
You should do these things and then do these courses i was
like nearly every test i've ever spoken to has ended up
in testing due to chance circumstance
that all they just have a passion for it and they just ended up
(07:24):
doing it and i guess isdqb gives you i can
start an entry route to get you into the
profession but it exists i
guess because like you said there is a gap in the market in terms of if
i wanted to be a developer i won't struggle to find a course on development
i will find i should find a degree that teaches me how to do that in any profession
i don't think you would struggle to find an university level course or qualification
(07:48):
to get you into that entry level it's strange that testing doesn't have that so i guess the istqb is,
come in because there is the absence of kind of accredited professional qualifications,
and it's had to it's become out of a necessity more than than anything else
but i think it is It's valuable because nothing else really exists.
There's no single point that you can talk to somebody, at least at a common
(08:10):
level, that they understand what testing is.
Yeah, just on the topic of ISTQB and education around testing, TMAP exists.
TMAP is a very good certification that is a little bit more practical.
But to your point, Steve, it's not as universally adopted, I suppose, than ISTQB would be.
(08:30):
But TMAP does exist, which helps. helps and then if you look at software engineering
degree specifically would i would i advocate for a testing specific degree probably
not as much as i said maybe a module within that because quality engineering
forms part of the whole software engineering,
life cycle anyway so i don't think spending three years on testing in university,
(08:54):
you're going to be it's going to be tricky creating curriculum for that but
as part of a an engineering degree or a software engineering degree, absolutely.
And do you, okay, so based on everyone's opinions, everyone feels it's a good idea.
It's worth having a foundation level ISTQB.
(09:15):
Okay, no, Jan, you're disagreeing. No, I agree with Stefan that it is good.
I think we as a tasting community should just recognize or realize what it gives you, right?
So I'm not saying it's a bad thing. we have
to be realistic of what you can and cannot do once you
have that so i think at some stage the testing community put
(09:35):
start to put too much emphasis on it and
maybe too little at the moment but it's it's because we
don't really understand the place of istqb and as
stefan as you said with with any learning if you
take two days to learn something you need to realize
that you've only spent two days and and
with respect it's a glossary of terms what what
(09:57):
do you call this what do you call that why do you call that and that's all you've done
for two days because you can for icgb you can spend two days
and write the exam on day three a lot of courses in south africa offers that
so you had two days learning words and that's
good because it gives you fundamental foundational appreciation of those words
and what they mean but that's all it is it does not make you something just
(10:17):
as you said any lawyer or any doctor would so again if i take two days and i
read a pilot's manual will they let me fly a plane now so well you're not even
and getting close to the airport.
And that's the same thing with the ISTQB. So yes, you understand the foundational
terms and you can, when someone speaks about it, yeah, that's it.
But that is all it gives you.
And if we recognize its place in the software world, I think then there is value
(10:43):
in it because at least we all speak the same language.
Yeah agreed and i was you know like is it
always useful to do it and i'll go down because i'm a context person
it depends if if you've been a tester for six to ten years and you're now a
senior lead running a team of 12 testers you probably don't need the foundation
course it's probably not going to add much in terms of value to you if you're
(11:06):
brand new into the profession you're straight out of university you're thinking
i'd like to know a little bit more about testing.
Certainly so or even if you've been doing for two or three years i think it
has it certainly has value but i don't think it's it really depends on your
career path and the eclectic nature of how testers get into the profession and
i think that's maybe the the,
problem with it like you've said of where does it sit in the grand scheme of
(11:29):
things it's not like other professions where if i wanted to be a doctor okay
i have to do this degree i have to go to this college i have to gain i have
to pass the bar if i'm a lawyer or something and now i'm accredited,
I don't think it carries the same weight or something like that because it's
only a smaller course right but I think it's it could maybe help
form part of what what that is yeah so
(11:50):
in my opinion if I have a candidate with five years of five years of experience
in testing and they do not hold an ISTQB certificate and then I have a candidate
with no testing experience and they They hold an ISTQB certificate.
I'll go with a tester that has more experience.
(12:12):
But what we are seeing now is that recruiters are putting so much emphasis on
the certificate, and then we end up losing very skilled candidates.
Yeah, I agree with that, Mamatla. Just coming back to one of the previous points,
Stefan, it's also about what we do with it.
And I was a TACE in the Netherlands, a TACE analyst. And my test manager forced
(12:37):
us, and maybe that's a good habit, of when I write a test case,
telling him what the test design technique was that I used to write that test case.
Now, it sounds silly, but it started forcing me to think about all the things
that I've learned in this ISTQB and now trying to apply it.
You made the comment of if you don't apply these things, it's pointless.
And that test manager actually forced me to say, yes, boundary value analysis
(13:00):
or whatever the case, partitioning. And then through that, I could refer back
to my learnings in the ISTQB and expand my test coverage that way.
But that's a practical way of forcing your team in inverted commas to actually apply that.
And once you start applying those things, then that reference manual is a good thing.
Because then you can refer back to it and say, oh, which design techniques are important?
(13:22):
So having a standardized place for these things is a good thing if you use it
and you start referring back to it.
Yeah, that's a really good point. That's maybe the kind of thing of my journey
into it. I did my STQB maybe like a year and a half into testing or something like that.
And then, oh, that's what I'm doing, black box testing techniques.
I didn't know that's what that was. I knew that's what I was meant to be doing,
(13:43):
but then that's what the name of it was or that phase of testing follows that phase.
I was just naturally following what was in front of me in the project.
It provides a context. It gives you that holistic view, which you don't really have.
You don't realize you're doing it. and that costed help
with that for sure yeah it's a really good point so one of the i guess one of
(14:04):
the critiques of istqb is often that it's too theoretical it's very theoretical
and you can have your istqb and it's not necessarily going to make you a good
tester do you feel that the.
Istqb foundation certificate prepares testers
well enough to actually be able to
(14:26):
deal with those real world scenarios and real world
challenges that they're going to encounter at their companies i would
say yes but not on its own it needs to be paired with somebody if if let's say
a new tester and they do that let's say they're brand new they do the icgb pairing
that with a senior test analyst or a lead helping them to show in a real world
(14:47):
how do you actually apply that like john said okay you've learned about black
box testing but here's a real scenario.
Where you could apply it or you know to understand or differentiate what type you should apply to
different scenarios that you need that human element that guidance
so but it is very good to have that
to at least ask you know i read about these types of testing are
you doing it or you know can have you thought about it or identify it you know
(15:11):
it's that reference point i think that's that's super important so yes but not
on its own is my answer and i think it helps more with the the technical aspect
like the nuts and bolts the mechanical nature of testing,
then it does some of the more business related practical implications so knowing
(15:31):
that i have to get make sure i've got my entry and exit criteria all defined
and signed off before i move phases,
that's great like i can now apply that theoretical learning into a practical
scenario but it can't help you with projects a product owner says i just want
to go live i don't care that you found that there's nothing in there i think
it could be for how do i do with that how
(15:53):
do I sell the value of testing back into something back into someone who doesn't understand it?
Cause the people that you're working with will have not done testing,
know about testing themselves.
So I don't think it equips you for those kinds of interactions. I would say.
Yeah, I think also, I also agree that, you know, ISTQB is very theoretical.
(16:16):
I think it's because of the fact that the body that offers the certification
does not have maybe like the facilities for learners to do practicals.
So maybe if there's collaboration between ISTQB and the universities,
then the universities will provide a setting for people to be able to,
(16:39):
you know, use that theory in real scenarios.
I really like that. I really like that, Mamatla.
If we are saying that it has to form part or we want it to form part of software
engineering, maybe that is a good place to start with that theory in a classroom
(17:00):
environment. So I like that point.
I think the sad thing is, I guess, how much emphasis has been put on having an ISTQB.
So I was just thinking, If any of you didn't have an ISTQB and there was a job
on LinkedIn that you had applied for, there's a very good chance that whoever's
(17:21):
filtering all of those applicants on the other side maybe has a keyword to check for ISTQB.
Now, you're getting ruled out because you don't have your ISTQB.
You might actually be the strongest candidate and the best candidate there,
but just because you don't have that, you may be not even getting seen.
And my question around that is,
is there an over-reliance or too much emphasis put on having an ISTQB as a company
(17:51):
or a recruitment agency or whoever?
Leon, I think the answer may be yes or no, I'm not sure, maybe a bit too much,
but my short answer is just get it and then it's not a concern. It's two days.
A lot of companies are actually saying we'll pay for you to go do the certification.
Like you said, it's two days of training, one day of writing it to eliminate that.
(18:15):
Uncertainty just get it i mean it's i'm looking at
how many there's so many courses on icgb the only
thing people are really worried about is the foundation not the others so
just do it i mean i'm saying just do it i know there's a financial and
a time thing but maybe a bit controversial but i'm sure
if you are talking to an employer and you don't have
it it would be strange almost if they wouldn't support
(18:37):
you in getting that certification and anything
over and above i would think is a bonus but i haven't seen many so sorry steve
i haven't seen many other cvs that they as met as a mandatory ictp certification
is over and above the foundation maybe test manager year and if it's a very
senior role but the others are all over and above in my opinion,
(18:58):
i was just going to play devil's advocate and that like yeah why don't just do it,
what happens if you're you're right at the beginning of your journey you've
got a big ton of student debt and you know okay now i have to spend i don't
know a thousand pound or whatever it is on the course and the qualification
and i've just finished my degree why do i now just go and do another qualification
(19:19):
that wasn't in my degree sure my degree is strong enough,
so i just applied as advocate and i think in those scenarios i think that the
reason why it's why people will ask for it as mandatory is because you might
have people in recruitment that haven't liaised with the testers in their organization
to say it's great if they have
ICTQB but it's not the be-all and end-all it doesn't need to be mandatory it's a nice to have.
(19:43):
It's not a mandatory thing so I think it's mandatory because a lot
of recruitment agencies and recruiters don't aren't testers
I haven't spoken to the testing community about it and I think that the community
is pretty split on whether how how mandatory is it and that's maybe why it goes
the way it does yeah I think for me if you are a lead that is going to onboard
(20:04):
bought somebody with no testing experience and no ISTQB.
It's so time consuming to upskill that person because you first have to start with the terminology.
You first have to start with making them understand the process.
So I think, yeah, if you don't have any experience in software testing,
(20:25):
I guess that will be a good start.
If you have experience and, you know,
like for a recruiter, we will say like, you shouldn't disqualify people if they
don't have their certifications and they have experience but from a person who's
going to onboard a junior with no testing OISTQB certification is very difficult.
(20:48):
Steve to go back to your point around not everyone comes from the same financial situation,
some people may struggle some people may not actually have
the cost to to do an istqb foundation do you
think we as an industry should be doing more to ensure that there is high quality
testing education accessible to everyone regardless of your of your financial
(21:12):
situation yeah but But I would expand it to if we talk about quality,
not just in engineering, but quality as a practice,
and that everyone, even at a primary, secondary school, college,
should have an understanding of the importance of quality in any industry that you go into.
(21:33):
And having that foundational background would be maybe more helpful than skewing
it to everyone needs to have an understanding of testing.
Thing maybe if you're doing computer science skewing it
i'd certainly make it like a mandatory module to talk
about but i think in general a lot of industries would
really benefit from people having an appreciation for quality management in
their systems and how that would impact the wider society i think it's a good
(21:56):
idea i don't know who wants to answer this one but have you noticed any significant
differences in career advancement opportunities for people who have
an ISTQB versus not have an ISTQB.
To the foundation? Sorry, I was just asking if it's specific to foundation.
Yeah, let's talk about just foundation.
(22:17):
I think as soon as you start looking at the more advanced levels,
I think that answer becomes yes.
Because if you have two people with the same sort of experience and the same,
I guess, background, but one person has an advanced level test manager role,
test manager certification, the other one doesn't.
(22:38):
I think that becomes more of a factor.
But just in terms of ISTQB Foundation, have you seen a clear,
I guess a significant career opportunity.
I guess, yeah, career opportunities for people with ISTQB versus now? I definitely haven't.
(23:02):
I think beyond getting you an initial foot in the door with the foundation, I don't believe so.
So I don't think I've never come across someone who's got head of QA position
because they've got test managers qualification and they're going,
oh, that's the final piece of the puzzle that now means you can be head of QA.
It's more likely that they've done six to 12 years of testing experience across
(23:22):
five different industries and managed teams of 30, 40 people.
Then he added a course that took me a week or two weeks or how long that course is.
I think, yeah, I think it's maybe the value stream is lessened as you go deeper into it.
But yeah that's just my personal experience okay so i think let's wrap this
up but i have one final question which is you've all obtained your istqbs what what is the one thing,
(23:50):
i'm sure there'll be more than one thing but maybe what is what is the one main
thing that you've taken from your istqb certification that you may be still
used today so is there one One thing from the foundation certification that you still use today,
consider when you're doing testing, consider when you're giving advice.
(24:11):
Think the one one thing that stands out is the
concept of entrance and exit criteria i think that's definitely something that
i always fall back and in any conversation even on in senior level conversations
is that you consider things when you before you accept it and that you consider
certain criteria before you
send it on so i think that concept to me has stuck yeah i was just gonna.
(24:33):
I'm skewed so i'm quite kind of process process and documentation i kind of quite like,
so for me is recognizing that and this will probably upset some agile people in the room,
is that i've never seen a project that has made that's been made worse by adding
extra documentation it's very rare it's normally the other end of the ball cave
(24:54):
which is we haven't got any documentation on how to do things and it's led to
poorer outcomes and the icdb does kind of,
favor a more structured and documented approach but that's pretty
kind of just appealing to my nature i think more than anything else more
than best practice i i think
for me i mean maybe this is just top of mind
because we did a internal company presentation that they're on
(25:16):
testing types and it's always like go
back to icb because i've got all the documentation and it was
actually quite interesting when we built a mind map about all the testing types
that they've defined and slots into each other it creates
clarity in a very potentially confusing world
with different different terminologies and how does this one relate to that
one and when we built it out visually although it's more theoretical and
(25:36):
text text heavy and like converted that into
a visual presentation it does help a lot in the world of testing to understand
how the different testing types fits into each other and how you separate them
and how they can collaborate or work together to to probably test your software
so in terms of me testing types you know that was quite a good one.
(25:58):
Yeah, for me, I would say requirements analysis, because if we can prevent defects
before they get introduced to code, I think I find that valuable.
And then also it just shows that quality, like testing does not just start with,
you know, dynamic testing.
(26:20):
Testing, static analysis is also very important because people have this misconception
that now with testing, after we have written code, then we hand it over to the testers to test.
Whereas with static analysis from ISTQB, it teaches you that testing is actually
part of the entire software development lifecycle.
(26:42):
So if I remember correctly, I think I did my foundation either in 2002 or 2004.
So let's assume that's 20 years. And there's still two things that stick with me.
And when I think about ISTQB, those are the first things that come up.
And that's boundary value analysis and equivalence partitioning.
That to me is what sums up ISTQB.
(27:05):
I don't know why those two specific things stuck with me. But when I think of
ISTQB, that's always the first thing that comes to mind.
Okay, so just as a summary. So if I was to say we all agree that there is definite
value in ISTQB, the foundation level, it brings good structure to how – well, not structure.
(27:28):
I guess it structures testing into
a good curriculum in terms of covering everything in terms of the basics.
It gives you that base level of what testing is about.
It covers everything around test processes and test types, et cetera.
And it's probably a good idea for someone that starts out.
(27:50):
On their testing career journey to actually undertake a foundation level,
try and get that certification.
But even if you're already fairly experienced, it may have less practical value.
But maybe from a applying for jobs in future perspective, it might be a good
(28:13):
thing to get it on your CV.
So I think it was Stefan that said it's only two days or three days.
So rather make that effort and get it behind your name, even if you don't necessarily
agree with it or necessarily think that it will bring value.
And then the other thing, obviously, is go and look at the ISTQB website because
(28:33):
there's actually a lot of different courses once you've obtained your foundation level.
That's the prerequisite for all of the advanced courses and the specializations.
But there's honestly, there are a lot of courses. And I only just realized earlier
today that the ICTQB was only created in 1998.
(28:53):
So it's only been going for sort of 26 years.
It's a long time, but they've also, they've expanded massively over the last
couple of years in terms of their offerings.
So I think they're moving in the right direction.
Mamatla, you made a good point about the practical. It's difficult to actually
give people that practical knowledge and practical experience.
(29:15):
We have that same challenge internally when we have our interns that complete
their training and we have to try and find practical exercises,
practical situations for them to actually try and apply what they've learned.
So I think ISTQB is always going to suffer, I guess, that pointed remark that
(29:36):
it's too theoretical, it's not practical enough.
But I think you need to take that theory and try and find situations in your
career to actually apply what you've learned practically.
Any closing remarks other than maybe it's a good idea to get your foundation level?
(29:59):
And a better idea to start using and applying it. Agreed. This has been an episode
of Testing Experts with Opinions, an inspired testing podcast.
Find us on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok,
where we're driving conversations.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.