Timeline for How do I satisfy external auditors that automated tests are at least as effective as manual tests?

4 events

when toggle format	what		by	license	comment
Jun 6, 2011 at 23:18	comment	added	corsiKa♦		It's so tough. You need to justify your time spent on the test suite, and for that you need meaningful, cost effective results. But until you can invest that time, you won't get anything back from it! It's so difficult to convince management that things like this are worth it in the long run.
May 12, 2011 at 16:33	comment	added	Rakesh Prabhakaran		Yes ie the hard side of this method Tristaan. Until your Automation suite becomes quiet stable and the auditor gets satisfied with the efficiency of your test suit with a good coverage, you may have to spend some fair enough time on both manual and automation.
May 12, 2011 at 15:58	comment	added	TristaanOgre		That's the tack I'm currently taking, Rakesh. We're running tests manually and automated in parallel to show that the outputs of both sets of tests are the same, that the tests are finding the exact same kinds of defects, and that the automation is actually more reliable and faster than the manual processes. The only problem with this approach is that it is very resource intensive in that it sucks up a LOT of personnel resource to do both paths until such time as the auditors are satisfied.
May 12, 2011 at 15:37	history	answered	Rakesh Prabhakaran	CC BY-SA 3.0