Although this is not a correct translation it might make things more clear then call it "Innoveer jij mee!"
Today I attended a free seminar sponsored by Ordina with to great speakers: Gojko Adzic @gojkoadzic en Anko Tijman @Agiletesternl
The evening started with a long row to obtain "bad" coffee. With this start everything can only improve. And it did. Sure, there are always some things which are worse or could be better. Let me start with some small notes about the impression I gained. It is not the full story, just some snap shots and ideas.
As the chairmen mentioned, "Oh, no, not that again" It was not about testers and developers. Us and them. Hearing Gojko mentioned these words I immediately thought about the song from Pink Floyd Us and Them
Looking to the lyrics it can be so true. It also start with:
"Us and Them
And after all we're only ordinary men"
Gojko did not emphasize the idea of Us and Them. What I remembered was that he want to skip the functions. In teams we don't need functions, we perhaps need roles. We should get rid of our who's to blame culture.
He started with a great statement "Why are we[programmers] going to stop telling testers how to do their job? They know testing much better than we do!"
There is still some discussion possible if developers should test or testers should test. I think we should do both. I will come back to this later on.
In my opinion he used a very strong example. (Keep in mind that these are some pieces I remember from this evening. Therefore these are my interpretation and words).
A driving instructor is not telling you: you hit that car, and that car and that pedestrian. A driving instructor is teaching you how to drive.
A similar thing we testers should also do. Teach the developers how to test, participate. If they are able to do the testing for you. You gained time to do more important things.
Meanwhile @michelkraaij tweeted a statement @gojkoadzic, you keep making the distinction between developers and testers. Testers ARE developers!
We discussed this in the short break and Gojko marked that within a role there is also persons are involved. I translated that into a thought that personality is also important how a person can interact within his role.
So I polluted the twitter sphere with this idea as response:
ppl matters,personal value creates personality help define skills 2 form attitude able to act in a role
My idea with this statement is that it is easy to think that every one should be able to test or develop or do the same. Skills should be equal. Who does is doesn't matter. If people are involved we should respect them and human beings with a certain value. People differ and therefore have different personalities. I think the personality able a person to use their values under certain circumstances which will express their skills under those conditions. When it is noticed, people will respond on it and this will influence their attitude. And now based on the attitude, the presentation of the role which is needed will be express also. (don't shoot me for these thought, it are just ideas which seems reasonable to me, I did not read a book to support these ideas)
As promised, based on this concept it should not either be developers or testers who do the testing. Testing should be done by those who care about testing. If a developer cares about testing then let him test.
This was in other words also Gojko thought; he explained that when testers were involved quality reduced as they rely on the tester and no longer on their own skills/value (testing).
I think this can also be expressed by the words from Pink Floyd from the song mentioned earlier "And who'll deny that's what the fightings all about
Get out of the way, it's a busy day"
Agility in the waterfall?