Brian Rice, in his keynote speech at StarEAST 2006, made a great point: He said “Talking to developers is like talking to monkeys.” What he meant — at least, what I thought he meant — was that software testers and software developers have trouble communicating. Although he was only trying to be funny, I think he was making a much more direct point.

I don’t think software developers and software testers are speaking the same language. Both developers and testers have the same goal — that is, they are trying to engineer good software — however, I think there are many cases where they don’t understand each other. Brian, mentioned above, was blaming the developers for the communication problem; he was jokingly saying that developers have a lower cognitive ability, and that testers are, in fact, the better, evolved human form. Although some testers may believe they care more for the software than the developers do, I don’t think this problem has only one side to blame.

Take this example for instance: Two people are asked to communicate; one person in English, and the other in Chinese. They must only communicate through text, they must never use an interpreter, and they cannot — by any means — meet in person to judge facial expressions. Do you think these people would have communication problems? If I had to guess, I’d say so.

Although this is an oversimplification of the problem, I think it is parallel with what companies are asking developers and testers to do. Developers and testers must, by all means, talk about a bug through a bug tracking system. These systems are great for management, in that they provide ways to audit bugs, analyze metrics, and promote insight into the status of a software project; however, I don’t think they are that great for the people actually doing the work. Could these bug reporting systems, with all their benefits, be getting in the way of tester-developer communication? Could these systems — for the sake of auditability, metrics, and insight — be causing unwanted side effects to those actually communicating? Although I have no definitive answers to these questions, I’d like to cite this example as some proof that bug reporting systems may be doing more (or less!) for communication than we actually think they’re doing. We might — if I’m at all on to something — need to rethink the way we do this.

What do you think? At the end of the day, I’m simply one man — and in fact, I’m just a student. I’d love to hear from people who have different — if not contrasting — views on the topic, who’ve actually spent some time getting work done. If there is anybody out there who’d like to comment on their experience, I’d love to hear it.

2 Comments on “Are we speaking the same language?”

  1. 1 Jared said at 3:35 am on June 30th, 2006:

    On communication issues, I see it as two people, in the same place, having completely different views of what is going on around them. Even if two people stated the same goal of ‘trying to engineer good software’, those two people have different concerns, see different problems, and have different definitions of goodness.

    Regarding bug reports, I’m feeling lately that the act of writing something down is a solution to a problem. With the decision to write that thing down, and the level of detail that we provide, we make a number of tradeoffs, all with potential upsides and downsides. This is true of specifications, it will surely be true of bug reports.

    At the heart of it is ‘Individuals and interactions over processes and tools’. Is it the use of the tool or the process that makes sub-optimal interactions more likely, or is it the values of the individuals? The answer is, as always, ‘it depends’, but it’s a question we need to ask of our situation when we consider the potential outcomes of a process or tool change.

  2. 2 One of the Wolves » My 100th Post! said at 6:54 am on July 18th, 2009:

    [...] one was actually my second, though I think it qualifies. Read at your own [...]

Respond