A Context-Driven Approach to Delivering Business Value

This is Part IV in a series of entries inspired by the following quote from the "about page" of context-driven-testing.com hosted by Cem Kaner:

"...However, over the past 11 years, the founders have gone our separate ways. We have developed distinctly different visions. If there ever was one context-driven school, there is not one now..."

And James Bach's blog update (Context-Driven Testing at a Crossroads):

"I’m the last of the founders of the Context-Driven School, as such, who remain true to the original vision. I will bear its torch along with any fellow travelers who wish to pursue a similar program."

If you haven't done so already, I recommend starting with:

• Part I: Is Testing Dead? Dunno, but the Context-Driven School Is 
• Part II: With the Context-Driven School "closed" what's next?
• Part III: Context-Driven School (of thought): "I'm not dead yet... I feel happy!"

---

So far I've established that I'm a Context-Driven guy. For completeness, I should also share that I'm a guy who is most comfortable operating as part of a healthy team that embraces Agile principles, but who recognizes that Agile is not the most appropriate or effective answer for all organizations, teams, or situations.

I've also noted that I find the notion of "product" in both Context-Driven and Agile principles to be too subtle of a reference to the fact that the propensity of software is developed in a business context for my tastes. This is mostly due to many, many personal observations of individuals involved in the process of developing and delivering software emphasizing some aspect of the software over business value -- from individuals who self-identify as Context-Driven, Agile or neither.

The reality that I have lived in since beginning my career as a technologist is that, business is the primary context-driver behind the development of the propensity of software and that money is the primary context-driver behind business (yes, I know, that's a broad generalization, with somewhat ambiguous qualifiers -- I'm going to ask you trust that I'm happy to support and specify that statement if needed, but for the time being, please accept the premise... at least while reading the remainder of this post.)

2 Cents on Ethics

I really had no plan to chime in on the blog conversation between Michael Bolton and Cem Kaner, but after the amount of time I've spent today having email discussions with folks who (apparently) were interested in my 2 cents, I've decided to go ahead and share. I feel it important to point out that as I have spoken to neither of them regarding this conversation, I most certainly don't want to give the impression that I am speaking for either of them.

(As a side note, I'm seriously beginning to wonder if I shouldn't just add a "Notes and Disclaimers" box to my blog... then again, that would be about the same as prefacing all my notes and disclaimers with "Allow me to provide some context" -- which would seem rather redundant coming from me. {grin})

Anyway, it would seem that it all started with Michael's post Why Pass vs. Fail Rates Are Unethical (Test Reporting Part 1) that, if not inspired, certainly contributed to Cem's post Contexts differ: Recognizing the difference between wrong and Wrong which, unsurprisingly, triggered the following post by Michael I Might Be Wrong (But Not For Me)

Ok, all caught up? Good. Lemme share what I think might be happening here and while I'm at it share my model for approaching ethics-related situations in business environments (testing or otherwise).

Context-Driven School (of thought): "I'm not dead yet... I feel happy!"

This is Part III in a series of entries related to the following quote from the "about page" of context-driven-testing.com hosted by Cem Kaner:

"...However, over the past 11 years, the founders have gone our separate ways. We have developed distinctly different visions. If there ever was one context-driven school, there is not one now..."

If you haven't done so already, I recommend starting with:

• Part I: Is Testing Dead? Dunno, but the Context-Driven School Is 
• Part II: With the Context-Driven School "closed" what's next?

---

Ok, so maybe not "happy" but I couldn't resist the Monty Python reference.

James Bach stated on his latest blog update (Context-Driven Testing at a Crossroads):

"I’m the last of the founders of the Context-Driven School, as such, who remain true to the original vision. I will bear its torch along with any fellow travelers who wish to pursue a similar program."

With the Context-Driven School "closed" what's next?

This is Part II in a series of entries related to the following quote from the "about page" of context-driven-testing.com hosted by Cem Kaner:

"...However, over the past 11 years, the founders have gone our separate ways. We have developed distinctly different visions. If there ever was one context-driven school, there is not one now..."

If you haven't done so already, I recommend starting with Part I: Is Testing Dead? Dunno, but the Context-Driven School Is

---

Much like when one completes an educational program at one institution and ponders whether or not to enroll in another program (and if so, which one), or to enter the workforce and continue their learning along the professional development or self-education path, I think it's fair for those who have come to self-identify as members of the Context-Driven School to be asking themselves similar questions.

And much like completing an educational program does not equate to losing the lessons learned (as opposed to the lesson's taught) in the program, the Context-Driven Principles and the lessons many of us have learned by studying in (or, for that matter, rebelling against) the Context-Driven School remain despite Cem's announcement that (in my words) the school is now closed.

Is Testing Dead? Dunno, but the Context-Driven School Is

Well, I'm sure this is a bit of a shocker for many of you, but the following quote comes from the "about page" of context-driven-testing.com hosted by Cem Kaner:

"...However, over the past 11 years, the founders have gone our separate ways. We have developed distinctly different visions. If there ever was one context-driven school, there is not one now..."

This is Part I of a series of entries on this topic. Links to subsequent parts will be added to the bottom of this entry as they are posted.

---

Of course, this doesn't  negate or erase the Context-Driven Principles, and Cem has committed to keeping the original content on landing page of the revised site:

"...When you land on this site, you see the context-driven-testing.com landing page (the Principles) as it was when we originally published it. I’ll keep it that way (with the same set of Principles), because several people have found it useful..."

To my way of thinking, the *most* important point made by Cem on the About Page is the following:

..."This notion of evolution comes with a built-in assumption: If my thinking will evolve to something else in the future, it must be wrong today. Progress on my path to better understanding and practice of testing (and of anything else that I’m serious about) includes discovering what needs to be changed in my thinking, and changing it.

This is an important aspect of science. We don’t run experiments to confirm what we already know. We run experiments to prove that what we think we already know is wrong. And to help us develop something better..."

This is the point I'd like folks to focus on.