Blogpost as published on Capping IT off: http://www.capgemini.com/technology-blog/
As testers we know that being involved in an early stage of the development cycle will save money on defect solving in the last stages of the development cycle. This is also confirmed and visualized by Boehm. As a frequent test(manager) in chain testing assignments I see much more then only the software that is to be used, but also get involved in the processes that are set up around the usage of the software (and even non-software-usage-processes) and more than once have I found that it would have been very nice to have been involved in the ‘design’ of those too, the earlier the better. So that got me thinking, what is before processes and software? Well, for instance; Enterprise Architecture.
And then I really got going. Are Enterprise Architectures testable? And will the impact be the same if a tester is involved in setting up one as the Boehm curve says, if so, what money will that save? What ís the financial impact of an error in an Enterprise Architecture, or for that manner, what is the image damage when an enterprise architecture isn’t set up right or is the impact of a defect in the set up architecture that big, that it will affect the whole existence of an organization? Then I got more practical; how does one test an Enterprise Architecture? I think to answer that question is to firstly get clarity on the requirements of an Enterprise Architecture and that’s where the crux is, because most requirements that I found, mind: I only did some brief investigation here, on Enterprise Architectures aren’t very measurable or SMART (or checked for that matter). So in able to test an Enterprise Architecture in the future, I plea for starting to involve testers right at the setup, so we can learn and develop this area of expertise, I’m convinced that it will have huge benefits to have a validated architecture in the future, which –if Boehm ís applicable- will save a lot of money. I’m very interested to hear more opinions on this, so please don’t hesitate to contact me on this one, I’d love to hear it! To be continued (I’m sure!)…
zondag 15 november 2009
woensdag 4 november 2009
Standardization Agile, Agile Standardization
(previous Dutch blog in English version - on request :-) )
Discussion can be joined at: FunTESTic's Forum
The last couple of weeks two subjects have been in the spotlight for me: 'Agile', because of TestingExperience had a special (sept. 2008, issue nr. 7) and 'Standardization', because I'm a member of the NEN NC 381007 and have a lot to do with that in that role.
Off course a connection is quickly made and then I started thinking about standardization within Agile of even 'Agile standardization' (can that be done?). It occured to me that a lot of colleagues that I talked to, the subjects rule eachother out. Apparently the perception is that 'standardization' hinders an agile project per definition. Standardization is associated with slow, sluggish and bureaucratic while 'agile' is associated with fast, flexible and non-bureaucratic. Further more is seems that almost everybody seems to think that 'standardization' (and with that 'certification' and normalization) stands in the way of innovation (whether this is innovation of programming or processes)
I wouldn't write about this if I didn't have another opinion. I experience a hgreat amount of freedom to nnovate when there's standardization, I'm not occupied with worries of connecting and making sure everything fits toghther. I can use time to work on new ideas instead and it stimulates my creativity to find solutions that fall within the boundaries of a standard. Also, even though standards are in place to create a solid ground, it doesn't forbid to suggest improvements. Standards are just as good prone to development as any other product, progressing insights and innovation can have an impact on an approved standard so that it can evolve to a newer version of this standard.
And than the Agile stuff; I don't see this as a hindrance either.
I think diversity within the Agile area causes delay, first one must define wich boundaries there are at development, while a standard has that allready in place so that everybode can start right away and there will be no discussions on the way to work. I wont'discuss al the aspects here, because I think the bottomline is clear. I'm curious how others think about this, so please join this discussion!
Discussion can be joined at: FunTESTic's Forum
The last couple of weeks two subjects have been in the spotlight for me: 'Agile', because of TestingExperience had a special (sept. 2008, issue nr. 7) and 'Standardization', because I'm a member of the NEN NC 381007 and have a lot to do with that in that role.
Off course a connection is quickly made and then I started thinking about standardization within Agile of even 'Agile standardization' (can that be done?). It occured to me that a lot of colleagues that I talked to, the subjects rule eachother out. Apparently the perception is that 'standardization' hinders an agile project per definition. Standardization is associated with slow, sluggish and bureaucratic while 'agile' is associated with fast, flexible and non-bureaucratic. Further more is seems that almost everybody seems to think that 'standardization' (and with that 'certification' and normalization) stands in the way of innovation (whether this is innovation of programming or processes)
I wouldn't write about this if I didn't have another opinion. I experience a hgreat amount of freedom to nnovate when there's standardization, I'm not occupied with worries of connecting and making sure everything fits toghther. I can use time to work on new ideas instead and it stimulates my creativity to find solutions that fall within the boundaries of a standard. Also, even though standards are in place to create a solid ground, it doesn't forbid to suggest improvements. Standards are just as good prone to development as any other product, progressing insights and innovation can have an impact on an approved standard so that it can evolve to a newer version of this standard.
And than the Agile stuff; I don't see this as a hindrance either.
I think diversity within the Agile area causes delay, first one must define wich boundaries there are at development, while a standard has that allready in place so that everybode can start right away and there will be no discussions on the way to work. I wont'discuss al the aspects here, because I think the bottomline is clear. I'm curious how others think about this, so please join this discussion!
maandag 26 oktober 2009
Standaardisering Agile, Agile Standaardisering
De afgelopen weken hebben bij mij voornamelijk de onderwerpen ‘Agile’ en ‘Standaardisering’ in de schijnwerpers gestaan. ‘Agile’, omdat de TestingExperience er een hele uitgave (sept. 2008, nr. 7) aan gewijd heeft en ik collegae heb die het onderwerp veel aanstippen. Standaardisering omdat ik nu eenmaal in een standaardiseringorgaan zit als actief lid en als zodanig er veel mee te maken heb.
Nu is natuurlijk een link snel gelegd en dan ga je denken over standaardisering binnen ‘Agile’ of zelfs ‘Agile standaardisering’ (kun je dat hebben?). Het viel mij op dat het bij veel collegae die ik spreek het ene onderwerp het andere eigenlijk al uitsluit, want blijkbaar is de perceptie dat standaardisering per definitie een ‘Agile’ project in de weg staat. Standaardisering wordt geassocieerd met traag, log en bureaucratisch terwijl ‘Agile’ juist voor snel, flexibel en non bureaucratisch te boek staat.
Verder lijkt men, uitzonderingen daargelaten, ook te denken dat ‘standaardisering’ (en mede daarmee ook ‘certificering’ en normering) een (hoge mate van) innovatie (of dit nu innovatie in programmeerwijzen of processen zijn) in de weg staat.
Ik zou hier niet wat over schrijven als ik niet een andere mening aangedaan was. Ik ervaar een hoge mate van vrijheid om te innoveren wanneer er gestandaardiseerd is; ik ben immers niet bezig met zorgen dat alles gelijk is en aansluit, maar kan tijd besteden aan nieuwe ideeën en het stimuleert mijn creativiteit om oplossingen te vinden die binnen de grenzen van een standaard vallen. Bovendien zijn standaarden er dan wel om standvastigheid te creëren, maar het verbiedt niet om verbeteringen aan te dragen. Standaarden en normen zijn net zo goed onderhevig aan ontwikkelingen als ieder ander product, voortschrijdend inzicht en innovatie kunnen net zo goed invloed hebben op een geaccepteerde standaard zodat deze evolueert tot een nieuwe versie of standaard. En dan de ‘Agile’ stuff; ook hier zie ik standaardisering niet als struikelblok. Ik denk dat de diversiteit binnen het ‘Agile’ gebied juist voor een vertraging zorgt, er moet immers eerst worden bepaald binnen welke grenzen alles wordt ontwikkeld, terwijl een standaard dat juist al duidelijk aangeeft zodat een ieder gelijk van start kan gaan en er over werkwijzen geen discussie kan ontstaan. Het gaat te ver om alle aspecten hier te behandelen, maar ik denk dat de bottomline wel duidelijk ik. Ik ben benieuwd hoe anderen hier over denken dus ik zie graag reacties tegemoet.
Nu is natuurlijk een link snel gelegd en dan ga je denken over standaardisering binnen ‘Agile’ of zelfs ‘Agile standaardisering’ (kun je dat hebben?). Het viel mij op dat het bij veel collegae die ik spreek het ene onderwerp het andere eigenlijk al uitsluit, want blijkbaar is de perceptie dat standaardisering per definitie een ‘Agile’ project in de weg staat. Standaardisering wordt geassocieerd met traag, log en bureaucratisch terwijl ‘Agile’ juist voor snel, flexibel en non bureaucratisch te boek staat.
Verder lijkt men, uitzonderingen daargelaten, ook te denken dat ‘standaardisering’ (en mede daarmee ook ‘certificering’ en normering) een (hoge mate van) innovatie (of dit nu innovatie in programmeerwijzen of processen zijn) in de weg staat.
Ik zou hier niet wat over schrijven als ik niet een andere mening aangedaan was. Ik ervaar een hoge mate van vrijheid om te innoveren wanneer er gestandaardiseerd is; ik ben immers niet bezig met zorgen dat alles gelijk is en aansluit, maar kan tijd besteden aan nieuwe ideeën en het stimuleert mijn creativiteit om oplossingen te vinden die binnen de grenzen van een standaard vallen. Bovendien zijn standaarden er dan wel om standvastigheid te creëren, maar het verbiedt niet om verbeteringen aan te dragen. Standaarden en normen zijn net zo goed onderhevig aan ontwikkelingen als ieder ander product, voortschrijdend inzicht en innovatie kunnen net zo goed invloed hebben op een geaccepteerde standaard zodat deze evolueert tot een nieuwe versie of standaard. En dan de ‘Agile’ stuff; ook hier zie ik standaardisering niet als struikelblok. Ik denk dat de diversiteit binnen het ‘Agile’ gebied juist voor een vertraging zorgt, er moet immers eerst worden bepaald binnen welke grenzen alles wordt ontwikkeld, terwijl een standaard dat juist al duidelijk aangeeft zodat een ieder gelijk van start kan gaan en er over werkwijzen geen discussie kan ontstaan. Het gaat te ver om alle aspecten hier te behandelen, maar ik denk dat de bottomline wel duidelijk ik. Ik ben benieuwd hoe anderen hier over denken dus ik zie graag reacties tegemoet.
zaterdag 10 oktober 2009
FYRA-ious, a new train, press and money
***my latest column in the Capgemini CoP IT Testing Newsletter***
It has taken a couple of years, but finally it happened: We are riding! The last couple of months have been a sequence of events, last minutes checks, experimental farms, checking again and making small adjustments (and checking again), marketing events and an excited buzz in the office hallways. Finally I didn’t have to set a whole new test planning to a new (predicted) launch date. No, this time it was for real!
It all started with the introduction of our ‘mascotte’, an odd figure with a very funny hairdo that walked through the office to introduce himself as ‘hispeed’. I think most of the colleagues were afraid of him because there seemed to be a spontaneous migration from people from one office to another; mostly to the location where the funny lad didn’t reside.
Then there was the introduction of the new train, with a visit to the Watergraafsmeer where the ‘Albatros V250’ was to be seen (it was pushed to this location by another locomotive, but that didn’t spoil the fun) and a large press event. We also received a nice gadget; a USB stick in the shape of a V250 with the promo film on it, complete with pink champagne and biscuit with pink aniseed comfits.
Next was the launch of THE NAME: FYRA. Again a party and again cake. For me – as tester – a huge blessing, because finally I could perform my last tests with the final name (instead of using ‘Albatros’ or ‘XXXX’), again one to scratch of the list!
The press is publishing like crazy about almost everything to do with the train, but also over things that have nothing to do with Fyra. For example an article in the Telegraaf: HSL almost causes accident in Rotterdam. Well actually it was the common intercity of NS (domestic) that had to break. Fyra had nothing to do with it. The so called almost-accident happened at 23.30 in the evening according to the article with a Fyra coming from Rotterdam. Odd, when you know that the last Fyra to leave Rotterdam (also during the test period) is at 22.00. The last train to ‘wear’ the Hispeed colours is the normal intercity from Brussels (23.10) which has been riding that trajectory for years. And how about the view from the window at that time? Ever tried looking outside the window of an intercity at night (the ones with the bended windows)? You don’t see a thing except some lights, let alone the colours of a train ‘raging by’. When I confronted the Telegraaf with the facts, their first reaction was that my findings had nothing to do with the article. When I even quoted pieces of the article and referenced them with the correct information, I was ignored completely. They refused to rectify the article or place the rectifying comments I wrote. Awake? Not really. Censure? You bet!
And then the lasts steps; the train itself (not yet the fast edition but the slow-Fyra) has to go in production. Everything is set onto pre-production, again checking the systems one last time. And then on the 7th of September it is finally happening: all systems are live and at 05.00 I’m buying a ticket via the yellow vendor machine on the station of Alkmaar, the whole backup team is stand-by and ‘the first’ departs Rotterdam at 06.00. Fingers crossed and…. YES, it works! Finally after two years of delay we have a running Fyra, which –by the way- is riding on schedule perfectly!
Oh, and are you reading about ‘that expensive’ train, then I would like to invite you to do your own independent investigation (some media are a bit ‘coloured’ in their publishing). For example; a return ticket from Amsterdam to Rotterdam, second class will cost you (in the introduction period) 4 euro’s for a supplement (that is extra on the regular NS ticket). Your gain is 20 minutes per travel, thus 40 minutes for 4 euro’s or 6 euro’s per hour. Is that expensive? I hope, for their sake, that those journalists earn a bit more, but apparently they find themselves expensive at 6 euro’s per hour and therefore they are payed way too much!
It has taken a couple of years, but finally it happened: We are riding! The last couple of months have been a sequence of events, last minutes checks, experimental farms, checking again and making small adjustments (and checking again), marketing events and an excited buzz in the office hallways. Finally I didn’t have to set a whole new test planning to a new (predicted) launch date. No, this time it was for real!
It all started with the introduction of our ‘mascotte’, an odd figure with a very funny hairdo that walked through the office to introduce himself as ‘hispeed’. I think most of the colleagues were afraid of him because there seemed to be a spontaneous migration from people from one office to another; mostly to the location where the funny lad didn’t reside. |utmccn=(direct)|utmcmd=(none)&__utmv=-&__utmk=169202465)
Then there was the introduction of the new train, with a visit to the Watergraafsmeer where the ‘Albatros V250’ was to be seen (it was pushed to this location by another locomotive, but that didn’t spoil the fun) and a large press event. We also received a nice gadget; a USB stick in the shape of a V250 with the promo film on it, complete with pink champagne and biscuit with pink aniseed comfits.Next was the launch of THE NAME: FYRA. Again a party and again cake. For me – as tester – a huge blessing, because finally I could perform my last tests with the final name (instead of using ‘Albatros’ or ‘XXXX’), again one to scratch of the list!
|utmccn=(direct)|utmcmd=(none)&__utmv=-&__utmk=77011605){kind=logo}
The press is publishing like crazy about almost everything to do with the train, but also over things that have nothing to do with Fyra. For example an article in the Telegraaf: HSL almost causes accident in Rotterdam. Well actually it was the common intercity of NS (domestic) that had to break. Fyra had nothing to do with it. The so called almost-accident happened at 23.30 in the evening according to the article with a Fyra coming from Rotterdam. Odd, when you know that the last Fyra to leave Rotterdam (also during the test period) is at 22.00. The last train to ‘wear’ the Hispeed colours is the normal intercity from Brussels (23.10) which has been riding that trajectory for years. And how about the view from the window at that time? Ever tried looking outside the window of an intercity at night (the ones with the bended windows)? You don’t see a thing except some lights, let alone the colours of a train ‘raging by’. When I confronted the Telegraaf with the facts, their first reaction was that my findings had nothing to do with the article. When I even quoted pieces of the article and referenced them with the correct information, I was ignored completely. They refused to rectify the article or place the rectifying comments I wrote. Awake? Not really. Censure? You bet!
|utmccn=(direct)|utmcmd=(none)&__utmv=-&__utmk=178207269)
And then the lasts steps; the train itself (not yet the fast edition but the slow-Fyra) has to go in production. Everything is set onto pre-production, again checking the systems one last time. And then on the 7th of September it is finally happening: all systems are live and at 05.00 I’m buying a ticket via the yellow vendor machine on the station of Alkmaar, the whole backup team is stand-by and ‘the first’ departs Rotterdam at 06.00. Fingers crossed and…. YES, it works! Finally after two years of delay we have a running Fyra, which –by the way- is riding on schedule perfectly!Oh, and are you reading about ‘that expensive’ train, then I would like to invite you to do your own independent investigation (some media are a bit ‘coloured’ in their publishing). For example; a return ticket from Amsterdam to Rotterdam, second class will cost you (in the introduction period) 4 euro’s for a supplement (that is extra on the regular NS ticket). Your gain is 20 minutes per travel, thus 40 minutes for 4 euro’s or 6 euro’s per hour. Is that expensive? I hope, for their sake, that those journalists earn a bit more, but apparently they find themselves expensive at 6 euro’s per hour and therefore they are payed way too much!
vrijdag 11 september 2009
Me @ Capgemini's TestEvent 2009
It went well I think, it felt good and reactions were positive. That must count for something ;-)
Now I'm awaiting the results from the survey held afterwards...exiting!
Here are some pics of me during my presentation on Capgemini's TestEvent 2009 and during the 'thankyou's' at the end.
Now I'm awaiting the results from the survey held afterwards...exiting!
Here are some pics of me during my presentation on Capgemini's TestEvent 2009 and during the 'thankyou's' at the end.
vrijdag 4 september 2009
Telegraaf's Harry van Gelder blunders bigtime, should have tested his material first
Today a newsitem about Fyra was printed on the frontpage of the dutch newspaper 'de Telegraaf'
(http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/4753011/__Bijna-treinbotsing_hsl__.html?p=15,2)
According to the article there was a near-collision at Rotterdam with the new high speed train (Fyra) and an intercity from the Hague.
The journalist [Harry van Gelder] writes that the incident happened about 23.30h.
That rang a bell...because that makes the whole article one great farce! And I checked the one fact that made my bell ring:
The last high speed train leaves Rotterdam at 22.00h. (and yes, I know that traines do have a tendency to get delayed but not an hour and a half on a distance of a mile)
So how on earth can it be that de high speed train and an intercity nearly-collisioned at Rotterdam? The only possibility here is that the train mistaken for the high speed train was the normal Intercity between Brussel and Amsterdam, which leaves the Rotterdam station at 22.08h.
I tried to leave a reaction at the newssite of the Telegraaf but for some reason they keep refusing the message....I wonder why they are censuring me?
I think Harry should have tested his info first, before writing this article and making himself guilty of pure rabble-rousing.
***addendum ***
I did some further investigation on the near-collision article.
There was a TESTtrain (new material V250) driving from the HSL track TOWARDS the Rotterdam station (thus not as in the article is stated 'FROM Rotterdam'), it COULD have been around the time of 23.30, but this is still under investigation.
Certain is that this train is not a train in the regular train time table but an extra train due to testing.
This testtrain however was not driving fast or 'raging' as the journalist states, it was especially and carefully regulated over track-network just because of the fact it wasn't a regular train in the timetable.
When the train is driving FROM Rotterdam it couldn't have been the HST, but only the NS Hispeed intercity from Brussel and Antwerp, and then too it couldn't have been raging because then the train just left the station (and it doesn't start with a catapult as far as I know of ;-) )
It still makes the article HIGHLY UNLIKELY and a Monkey's sandwich.
(http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/4753011/__Bijna-treinbotsing_hsl__.html?p=15,2)
According to the article there was a near-collision at Rotterdam with the new high speed train (Fyra) and an intercity from the Hague.
The journalist [Harry van Gelder] writes that the incident happened about 23.30h.
That rang a bell...because that makes the whole article one great farce! And I checked the one fact that made my bell ring:
The last high speed train leaves Rotterdam at 22.00h. (and yes, I know that traines do have a tendency to get delayed but not an hour and a half on a distance of a mile)
So how on earth can it be that de high speed train and an intercity nearly-collisioned at Rotterdam? The only possibility here is that the train mistaken for the high speed train was the normal Intercity between Brussel and Amsterdam, which leaves the Rotterdam station at 22.08h.
I tried to leave a reaction at the newssite of the Telegraaf but for some reason they keep refusing the message....I wonder why they are censuring me?
I think Harry should have tested his info first, before writing this article and making himself guilty of pure rabble-rousing.
***addendum ***
I did some further investigation on the near-collision article.
There was a TESTtrain (new material V250) driving from the HSL track TOWARDS the Rotterdam station (thus not as in the article is stated 'FROM Rotterdam'), it COULD have been around the time of 23.30, but this is still under investigation.
Certain is that this train is not a train in the regular train time table but an extra train due to testing.
This testtrain however was not driving fast or 'raging' as the journalist states, it was especially and carefully regulated over track-network just because of the fact it wasn't a regular train in the timetable.
When the train is driving FROM Rotterdam it couldn't have been the HST, but only the NS Hispeed intercity from Brussel and Antwerp, and then too it couldn't have been raging because then the train just left the station (and it doesn't start with a catapult as far as I know of ;-) )
It still makes the article HIGHLY UNLIKELY and a Monkey's sandwich.
vrijdag 14 augustus 2009
Time flies
Again more than a month has passed since my last Blog, seems like only yesterday I wrote about the introduction of the name Fyra, but the datestamp doesn't lie (in this case) it is really more than a month. Time flies when you're having fun they say, so did I have fun?
Well.... in some cases I really did and in some cases it was just hard work.
I celebrated my vacation in the passed few weeks, so that was the really fun part. I was in Sumar (FR, NL) and some days at home, working on my Miniature House (which is one of my hobbies, you can see pictures of it on my Hyves). I visited the Planetarium of Eijse Eijsingha in Franeker, which I found very interesting! I also visited the seal shelter of Leny 't Hart in Pieterburen (they can use donations :-) ) and we visited SneekWeek for a day.
Before I could enjoy these fun days I had to work my **s off to get everything in order. My project was planned to go live on the 11th of August so everyting had to be allright, because I was to return on the 10th of August. Luckily it did, I finished the work that had to be done AND the project went live succesfully on the 11th (you can now buy tickets for Fyra :-) )
The last news I like to share is that I'm speaker at the Capgemini TestEvent 2009. It's about standardisation, normalization and certification as stable factor within a very rural (test)market. (and I still have to write the whole article :-$ AND make the presentation)
So I guess my time will still be flying the next couple of weeks!
Well.... in some cases I really did and in some cases it was just hard work.
I celebrated my vacation in the passed few weeks, so that was the really fun part. I was in Sumar (FR, NL) and some days at home, working on my Miniature House (which is one of my hobbies, you can see pictures of it on my Hyves). I visited the Planetarium of Eijse Eijsingha in Franeker, which I found very interesting! I also visited the seal shelter of Leny 't Hart in Pieterburen (they can use donations :-) ) and we visited SneekWeek for a day.
Before I could enjoy these fun days I had to work my **s off to get everything in order. My project was planned to go live on the 11th of August so everyting had to be allright, because I was to return on the 10th of August. Luckily it did, I finished the work that had to be done AND the project went live succesfully on the 11th (you can now buy tickets for Fyra :-) )
The last news I like to share is that I'm speaker at the Capgemini TestEvent 2009. It's about standardisation, normalization and certification as stable factor within a very rural (test)market. (and I still have to write the whole article :-$ AND make the presentation)
So I guess my time will still be flying the next couple of weeks!
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)