Software Test & Performance Collaborative

Community, Resources & Knowledge Sharing for Test & QA Professionals

Matt Heusser’s Blog

Testing at the Edge of Chaos

A Quantitatively Managed Process

By Matthew Heusser on November 3, 2009 | 3 comments.

There’s a value system out there that says that in order to prove any argument, you need data – and not just any data, but hard numbers.  (My father in law, David Ellinghausen, a quality engineer at Ford Motor Company for twenty years, once told me “Without data, your just another guy with an opinion.”)

But let me tell you a story …

I work at a Software As A Service (SaaS) company.  We have a website; customers pay us money for a login to the website, then pay for access on a monthly basis, typically on an annual contract.  If we provide good service, people renew, and the revenue graph is a big, up-sloping curve. Why, to make money, we don’t have to do anything but keep our customers.  Yes – it turns out, as the quality of web apps continues to improve, that’s a bit of an understatement, but I hope you see what I mean.

Now, imagine it’s the beginning of the first quarter of a the new year.  We engaged a outside form to perform some research for us – to figure out our customers budgets, their social media strategy, to determine our budget and sales quotas.  Picture these two different scenarios:

Scenario 1: The account rep bursts in the room, his face flushed, his tie loosened, with some papers in his left hand.  He gulps, looks at the floor, slowly looks up, turns to the CEO and says “We just finished running the numbers. 20% of our customers are not planning to renew next year.”

Scenario 2: The account rep walks into the room, smiling.  He shakes the hand of the CEO, gives a high-five to the VP of ops and VP of sales, puts his briefcase on the desk, unbuckles it, and pulls out a glossly, one-page overview, complete with pie chart. “Business is up.” he says “80% of our are customers are planning to renew this year.”

How would you expect the executives to behave in those scenarios?  Very differently, right?

… wait a minute …

Those two account executives just said the exact same thing.

As well all know (my friend Michael Bolton pointed it out again last week at STPCon), even when we have them, we do not make decisions based on numbers.  We make them based on how we feel about the numbers.

Numbers (quantities) don’t manage processes – people do.  Oh yes, there are rare exceptions that are interesting optimization problems.  For example, how much inventory to keep on hand for the Christmas rush – too much and you’ll waste money, too little and the shelves will sit empty.  But ask a computer to recognize that a shopping mall was just put in accross the street, thus foot traffic will improve … it won’t do it.

For that, you need a human as the master, with the number as the servant, as it should be.

Comments (3)

Justin Hunter
at November 3, 2009, 2:56 pm:

Matthew,

Another good post. As we’ve spoken about, I’m a big fan of human managers using actual data to make their decisions (as opposed to data-free “intuition”).

I wrote a software-development/software-testing related blog post about my thoughts “In Praise of Data-Driven Management (AKA “Why You Should be Skeptical of HiPPO’s”)”in my August 18th entry here (scroll to bottom of screen): http://hexawise.wordpress.com/

Thanks for continuing to post such good stuff. Your “How should I test this?” challenge was one of the best blogging pieces I have seen in recent months and your Fishing Maturity Model post was very thought-provoking as well.

Speaking of which, would you be game to try a data-driven pilot of two different testing approaches at SocialText to measure the relative efficiency and effectiveness in a pilot? (e.g., have two testers test the same app for one day each using tests they devise themselves; have one tester use tests determined by pairwise/combinatorial testing methods and the other use test cases they selected without using a pairwise/combinatorial testing tool)? I’m looking for additional empirical evidence for my research.

[Sure. Maybe we can even blog about it? :-) The problem I see is finding a testing problem that is a good fit. I'll send you something in the next week or so. I hope it's clear that I am open to using data - just not to being used by data.]

- Justin Hunter
Blog: http://hexawise.wordpress.com
Company: http://hexawise.com/intro_movie
Forum: http://testing.stackexchange.com

Justin Hunter
at November 3, 2009, 3:40 pm:

Matthew,

1) Awesome! I really look forward to helping work through a pilot and would love to work with you on a blog post or article. People often (IMHO) are too quick to assume combinatorial methods can only be applied in situations where rare conditions exist; if we can find a way to do it, it might be interesting to try to see what happens in two testing problems, one where there seems to be an obvious fit for combinatorial testing methods and a second that – at first blush – doesn’t seem to be a good fit for combinatorial testing methods.

2) I like your phrase “open to using data – just not being used by data.”

3) A couple points I forgot to mention in my original comment:
First, Kohavi (in the superb presentation he gives in the video I summarize in my blog post) expresses his view that “DATA TRUMPS INTUITION” especially on novel ideas. His advice, which I agree with, is to get valuable data through quick, cheap experimentation and he mentions that “The less the data, the stronger the opinions.”
Second, even if people go get data, it is often not so simple to analyze it properly because (as shown in your example, (a) people can look at the same data and analyze it differently, and (b) with respect to analyzing random/natural variation in particular, people are unfortunately often very bad at interpreting the data. They often invent special causes out of thin air when no actual special causes exist. See, e.g., my brother’s blog post on this: http://management.curiouscatblog.net/2007/10/30/fooled-by-randomness/

- Justin

Leave Comment

Name – required
Email – required
Website