Automation holds a lot of calibers to enhance software development. Not fortunate to say, although, automation is usually viewed as a luxury.

In the real world, deadlines are unforgiving, and as the test code is not product code, automation jobs are bestowed the lower priority and soaked into the black eye of the backlog. Some may claim that this is okay as it’s lean or because a fresh project is about to start.

However, we are here to turn the tables. In spite of taking automation in terms of the possibility, take automation as the opportunity cost. What happens if one doesn’t automate your tests from the get-go?

There exist a top 10 things from which you may wash your hands.

• Man Hours

Automated tests will run automatically. Manual tests should run manually. That’s existential. If you run only one test every time, then automation holds no ROI. But, if you run a test repeatedly, automation protects a tester from replicating themselves. Also, it’s simple: push the button and wait for outcomes. Automated tests always run rapidly as compared to manual tests, also. Acknowledging that engineer salaries are high and time is money, the man-hours are a crystal-clear opportunity cost.

• Coverage

Automated Tests can attain greater coverage than manual tests, specifically for regression testing. As product development advances, the absolute number of test cases raises. For instance, in Agile, the new tests will be crafted in every sprint. Older tests are required to run systematically to monitor that the new functionalities don’t hamper the existing functionalities. If regression tests are carried manually, then the testers should burn the hours grinding all through the akin tests repeatedly. Mostly, for expediency, this directs that they don’t follow some tests, not because of the lazy sense, but rather as the belonging of the risk-based strategy. Weaker coverage along with the risk of not allocating the bugs are followed only for the shorter testing time. If those (regression tests) were carried automatically, then there would exist no reason to compress the coverage as they would run easily.

• Consistency

Human is not perfect, they hold the habit of making mistakes. Similarly, manual tests are more likely to catch the human error as humans are only the carrier. Whereas, automated scripts go smoothly every time.

• Protection

Continuous integration (CI) safeguards the code from the defects from developing and testing all the codes that get altered in real-time. A CI system would trigger the tests automatically all the time. Tests that are not running in CI (akin to manual tests) are efficiently dead.

• Delivery Time

Continuous delivery (CD) is known to be the natural extension of continuous integration. Here, the software products can be delivered automatically (and also deployed potentially) as the last step in a CI queue. This way the big brands like Facebook, Google hold the caliber to deliver so fastly. No automation leads to no CD.

• Outcomes & Metrics

No engineers, be it product owners, managers, scrum masters, wish like asking the questions relevant to tests. Automated tests easily produce more comprehensive and more accurate outcomes. Automation embraces the capacity to generate the test reports, so the engineers are not required to waste the time in updating the wiki pages or drafting the emails.

• Accountability

The number just don’t lie, even the scripts don’t. Typically the engineers also don’t lie, but the outcomes from manual tests can include a fudge factor or even a mistake in any type of consistency or in reporting. Wrong outcomes may drive poor business decisions. On the contrary, automated outcomes tell in the exact way it is.

• Artistry

Manual testing pass into menial, repetitive labour: just conduct steps 1-10 repeatedly. It would be extremely effective for manual tests to target on the exploratory testing in spite of deterministic testing. While automated tests hold the capability to include repetitive, fixed test scenarios, exploratory testing enables the testers in finding artistic ways to reveal the defects and decide how well a product performs. Absence of automation links up the human capital.

• Peace of Mind

The value of peace of mind is caught in a tough time. Earlier we were required to develop a simple programming jargon and create a compiler for it. After every 7 days, we were demanded to append features of the new language like strings, arithmetic, arrays, and so on. Also, we used to write a heap of mini-programs to test the grammar updates to the new language. When the project was used to accomplish, we held with 1000 and more automated test cases going through JUnit with total coverage, and the whole suite took somewhat a few minutes to be carried. And there were various late nights when the tests allocate bugs in our language right before committing the code. There was no other way other than automated tests to move further successfully.

• Quality

The final motive of test automation is the product quality. Holding automation doesn’t essentially mean that the quality of the product is good. But, not holding automation seriously limits how the quality can be carried.