• This week I accidentally found TMMi (testing maturity model integration). As I am following Janet Gregory (as well as Lisa Crispin), she was mentioned in a post praising the QPAM model (which is a great model - and I recommend at least reading through it). Later on, the same author compared the QPAM against “the well-established” TMMi. I raised my eyebrows about how something that well-established did not fall under my radar over the last decade. But as soon as I googled I recognized a lot of specialists in testing are using it or its parts without knowing it (similarly to ISTQB). Apparently, TMMi resources are available online and have their assessments, certifications, and probably more. However, it is not a new thing, and it does not hold well against criticism since at least 2011 (“Immaturity of Maturity Models” by James Bach, “xMMwhy” by Michael Bolton, “Maturity Models” by Martin Fowler, etc.) Reading such articles and criticism I feel that maturity models were rewarded with a bad reputation because of failures related to tools/frameworks like CMMi and TMMi, and you cannot blame the tools - but you can blame the people living on the right-side of Agile Manifesto thinking that a good tool alone can solve all of their problems. Lastly, taking the criticism to maturity models into account, I have some ideas of how to make use of it in combination with some other models from other fields. But that is for later - stay tuned.

  • Scott Moore questions the term “non-functional requirements”, and I cannot agree more. However, it is difficult to find an accurate term for replacement. Therefore, it is difficult to make a change if one does not suggest how. And, talking about non-functional requirements, my recent experience suggests that ISO-25010 provides a nice guideline for brainstorming such requirements for a product.

  • Oh, and there was yet another episode from the never-ending drama series How Maaret Met James (and this time I got somehow involved in the comments). However, it is sad to see how much energy is spent on debating about debates and “the cult” instead of testing and/or quality practices. You can say I am partially guilty as well as I got involved, and you will be right, but… treating this post as an incident report, it is a very poor, one-sided, and opinionated report. You, do not write such reports. Ever.

  • Oh, oh, and there is more - two of the loudest voices in Modern Testing - Alan Page and Bryan Finster finally met in person for a podcast, and damn, that episode is great, you need to listen. Bryan has (a lot of) great stories to tell. How it is fundamentally wrong to assume that one can get the requirements right the first time. How that leads to a need for experimentation, frequent deployments, small batch sizes, short feedback loops… How traditional testing is wasting the talent of testers. Oh, I shut up, you should listen to this episode yourself!

  • Finally, I finally composed a page with my Recommended sources. I know it is nothing unique or different from what others do, but I feel it is worth digesting my opinions and emphasizing the most valuable pieces to follow for those who trust my judgment. Let me know any great sources I missed.