Love them or hate them, spreadsheets have played a big part in the way the world around us has developed. Using grids of columns and rows to organise data can be traced back to ancient Babylonia. However, it wasn't until the early 20th Century that the term 'spread sheet' was first used. Love them or hate them, spreadsheets have played a big part in the way the world around us has developed. Using grids of columns and rows to organise data can be traced back to ancient Babylonia. However, it wasn't until the early 20th Century that the term 'spread sheet' was first used. Since then, the spreadsheet has progressed significantly, and not just because it is now a compound noun rather than two separate words. The earliest digital spreadsheets were developed by IBM in the early 1960s. In 1979, VisiCalc was launched on the Apple II and in the early 1980s Lotus 1-2-3 and Microsoft's Excel – initially referred to as Multiplan – hit the market. Nowadays, you can take your pick of many options, though Google Sheets and Excel are the most commonly used. They offer familiarity, flexibility, and are often free or low-cost. But in terms of functionality, spreadsheets can be limited depending on the use case they're applied to. The limitations of spreadsheets for QA teams The limitations of spreadsheets for QA teams In many Quality Assurance (QA) teams, spreadsheets are commonly used to track and manage testing processes prior to the launch of software applications. Initially, they are capable of doing the job well, but as the complexity of the product grows and release cycles shorten, problems will arise. As features are added and releases become more frequent, spreadsheets expand into unwieldy sets of columns, tabs, and sheets, making them increasingly difficult to manage and maintain. There’s a possibility that you’ll need to create a new version of the spreadsheet at some stage, and that some team members could end up unintentionally working in an outdated spreadsheet, leading to time wasted on repeated testing or tracking down the most up-to-date data. There are a few tell-tale signs that the spreadsheets that QA teams are using aren’t up to the task. Firstly, team members will be frustrated. Secondly, inefficiency will rise, with teams working just as hard but achieving less. But the biggest sign to QA team leaders that spreadsheets aren’t the right tool will be a drop in the quality of the final product. Mistakes could be made because the relevant data wasn’t in the right version of the spreadsheet, tests may be missed, and bug reports aren’t routed back to developers meaning glitches don’t get fixed. How modern test management tools surpass simple spreadsheets How modern test management tools surpass simple spreadsheets Spreadsheets might be a useful multi-tool, but some jobs require precision instruments. Modern test management solutions have distinct advantages over spreadsheets for QA teams. For a start, everything exists within a single, centralised system, so there will be no issues with outdated versions. With modern test management tools there is structure around the data. Spreadsheets are limited in terms of logic, with no understanding of how two separate datasets relate to each other. With a specialised tool, created by a team of developers including UI and UX experts, you have an intuitive platform where data is organised properly, with everything categorised, searchable and tagged. Additionally, modern test management solutions can be integrated with other tools to help with data organisation and save QA teams time. For example, when an issue is discovered during the testing process, it can be filed in Jira and a link will automatically be created and everything logged in the test management tool. If they were using a spreadsheet, the engineer would then have to manually log details in the spreadsheet too or perhaps copy and paste them in. The test management platform streamlines the process, reduces the time engineers spend on basic admin tasks, and reduces the likelihood of any errors being introduced. The ROI of switching to a testing platform The ROI of switching to a testing platform It's clear, then, that it is beneficial for software companies to invest in test management platforms to enable their QA teams to work in a more structured and effective way. However, determining the ROI of implementing a test management solution isn't a clear-cut calculation. QA is a safety net for software companies. If they were to launch applications full of bugs and with poor UX then they would have unhappy customers, and also have to go through a costly process of fixing the bugs. But if they have adequate QA procedures in place, then they protect themselves from this scenario. Anything that has been overlooked, or that doesn't perform properly, is identified and can be fixed before launch. Compared this approach to the security measures in airports. The metal detectors, x-ray machines and bag searches aren't exactly convenient for passengers, but they are saving them from the possibility – however slight it might seem – of much greater harm. If you put protective measures in the right place, risk is much easier to manage. Spreadsheets don’t offer the level of protection that software companies need to be sure that no bugs have slipped through the net. Purpose-built test management platforms give QA teams everything they need to perform their job to the best of their ability, and minimise the risk for the organisation as a whole. How AI-enabled test management tools can bring additional benefits How AI-enabled test management tools can bring additional benefits Software companies that want to get more value from their test management solutions should consider how certain AI-enabled features would help them drive greater efficiency in their QA processes. For example, AI can help engineers structure and write text much more quickly when filing bug reports. Writing test case scenarios is another area where AI can save engineers time. With a few, well-chosen prompts it can compile the relevant text in grammatically correct, easy-to-read language that everyone on the team understands. Engineers don't have to think about picking the right words and where to put commas, meaning they can be more focused on their primary role and spend less time worrying about minor details. AI-enabled test management tools can potentially even learn to suggest the test cases that should be applied to tests for certain features, again based on prompts from the engineer. While it may not be able to provide an exhaustive list of tests to cover all eventualities, it can offer assistance by bringing up ideas that the human operatives possibly haven’t thought of. Takeaway: Selection and implementation is key to getting the best out of test management tools Takeaway: Selection and implementation is key to getting the best out of test management tools For software companies and QA teams looking to move beyond the limitations of spreadsheets, exploring dedicated test management solutions is a logical next step. As far as implementation is concerned, the best advice would be to start small and scale it up. Begin with a single project as a test, then once that project is completed invite all team members to share their experiences and observations so any issues can be identified before a wider roll out. Spreadsheets aren’t inherently unsuited to QA — in fact, they often serve as a sensible starting point for teams just getting established. They offer simplicity, accessibility, and a degree of structure. But as products grow more complex and testing demands increase, their limitations quickly become apparent. At that point, clinging to spreadsheets can do more harm than good. Investing in the right test management software is about evolving with the needs of your team and your product. Purpose-built tools bring the structure, clarity and automation that high-quality software development demands. And with AI-enabled features advancing rapidly, the opportunity to streamline workflows and reduce the risk of bugs slipping through is greater than ever.

Apple

The Human Testing Element is Still Important Despite Advances in AI 

Read My Stories

Too Long; Didn't Read

Make resilience your competitive advantage

Test Smarter, Not Harder: How Purpose-Built Test Management Tools Outperform Spreadsheets

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

The Human Testing Element is Still Important Despite Advances in AI

The Noonification: Use This 7-Step McKinsey Framework to Solve Any Problem (1/10/2023)

The Noonification: A Taxonomy of Inclusiveness (1/11/2024)

The Noonification: What is the InfiniteNature-Zero AI Model? (11/19/2022)

10 Ways AI Has Changed Our Lives

The Human Testing Element is Still Important Despite Advances in AI

The Noonification: Use This 7-Step McKinsey Framework to Solve Any Problem (1/10/2023)

The Noonification: A Taxonomy of Inclusiveness (1/11/2024)

The Noonification: What is the InfiniteNature-Zero AI Model? (11/19/2022)

10 Ways AI Has Changed Our Lives

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps