Everyone's doing testing now! ...Yay?

The chaps break with routine and bring a guest on the pod!Be sure to register for SmartBear’s upcoming webinar with Andy Weir, author of The Martian, where he’ll be talking about ‘From AI Chaos to Agentic QA’ Register here - https://smartbear.com/lp/from-ai-chaos-to-connected-software-quality/?utm_source=r-bradshaw&utm_medium=content-creator&utm_campaign=CP-26-q4-npi&utm_contentChris Armstrong runs developer relations at SmartBear, which means part of his job is telling a tool vendor what testers really think, and part of it is telling testers what that vendor is really up to. Sometimes it means saying "no chance" to both. That puts him in an interesting seat for the question hanging over this whole conversation. More and more testing is being handed to agents that go off and do the work while nobody is watching. So what happens to the people who used to do it, how do you know the agent did what it says it did, and who carries the can when it didn't? Vern opens by admitting he's no longer sure what his job even is. Rich has been putting SmartBear's own testing agent through its paces on camera, and it hasn't always behaved. And Chris has a confession about a school homework diary that might change how you read every green dashboard you see from now on.This episode is sponsored by SmartBear.00:00 - Intro01:22 - "What even is this job anymore?" Why Vern feels like he's failing, and is smiling anyway03:45 - What changed in how testers talked about AI at HUSTEF this year05:27 - A DevRel (manager no less!) on a testing podcast?!06:38 - If AI isn’t a tool, what is it?09:42 - DevRel in two words, and neither of them is "sales"12:52 - What happens if we clamp AI onto everything we've hated for 20 years14:29 - The company says A, the community is doing B. Whose side is DevRel on?17:35 - Useless consulting and what Chris calls decisive humility24:47 - Why Chris asked people why they hate test management tools, rather than run a survey28:19 - Application integrity is on Chris's T-shirt. What does it mean off it?29:57 - "Who tested this?" and the game credits Chris didn't want his name on31:47 - The CTO who vibe coded a customer onboarding platform, and what happened at review33:05 - Can you buy application integrity off the shelf?37:48 - Why Vern thinks test teams are about to start behaving like product teams40:59 - DIY, DWY, DFY? Vern explains42:11 - Everyone wants it done for them, right up until…44:58 - Testers asked for agency for years. Now we have to hand some of it over46:20 - BearQ hasn't always done what Rich wanted, and he isn't sure that's BearQ's fault50:00 - The dashboard Chris calls useless51:35 - The weak control check Chris beat at school, every single week52:36 - "Richard said he tested it" used to be proof. What counts when an agent says it?55:49 - What Andy Weir has to do with showing your work59:07 - The Richards QuestionLinks to stuff we mentioned during the pod:02:23 - HUSTEFTheir website (which currently features a familiar face on it 😄)03:07 - Chris ArmstrongChris's blogChris's podcast Testing Peers (of PeersCon fame!)Chris's YouTubeChris's LinkedInWe’ll add Chris's HUSTEF talk here once it’s available - VR06:18 - SmartBear toolsThe LoadNinja websiteThe SoapUI website06:41 - The LinkedIn thread on tools versus automation08:12 - ReadyAPIThe ReadyAPI website08:35 - BearQThe BearQ website10:56 - The book Developer Relations by Caroline Lewko and James Parton11:34 - The SmartBear Community25:02 - Chris's post asking why people hate test management tools [URL]26:03 - SmartBear webinar on the OpenAPI Specification updates [URL]26:03 - OpenAPI Specification [URL]28:30 - SmartBear on application integrity [URL]29:23 - Nicole van der HoevenNicole’s YouTube channelNicole’s podcast (that she co-hosts with the incredible Marie Cruz)Nicole’s LinkedInWe’ll add Nicole's HUSTEF talk here once it’s available - VR30:50 - Definition of ReadyYou can find a reasonable definition here34:12 - A one-page test plan article inspired by Claire Reckless’s work41:05 - An explanation of Do it yourself, done with you, done for you (albeit in the context of content creation)42:24 - Levels of driving automation (SAE J3016)54:27 - BearQ, the first assignable QA agent in Atlassian54:47 - We will NOT add Rich's HUSTEF keynote talk here once it’s available - VR56:02 - SmartBear event with Andy Weir, 22 October56:02 - Andy Weir the author of The Martian and Project Hail Mary56:22 - The StarTalk episode where Neil deGrasse Tyson talks to Andy Weir57:24 - Rich's BearQ video series58:14 - Vern's 30-day writing challenge58:22 - Øredev Conference, Malmö58:31 - The Automation in Testing (AiT) siteVernon's Yeah But Does It Work? newsletterCall to actionChris says a tool vendor can't do much with "I don't like it", and neither can we. So tell us why.If you agree, let us know. If you disagree, let us know. If you violently agree or violently disagree, definitely let us know. Guest episodes are an experiment for us, so we especially want to hear whether you'd like more of them, and who you'd like us to invite next. Questions, comments and concerns are all welcome.And don’t forget: Like, subscribe, and share 😊.

A listener asks which domino to push first, and the chaps immediately disagree about where to start.Shady has been a QA engineer for about five years and has recently joined a new organisation. Like most of us walking into somewhere new, he can see more things worth improving than he could ever get to at once, and no obvious order to do them in. So which one goes first? Vernon goes straight for wherever the pain is greatest. Richard says do it the other way round entirely, and has a spreadsheet ready to prove it. Between the two of them sits the part nobody warns you about when you take the job: the thing you were hired to fix is very often not the problem, your credibility to say so out loud has a half-life, and the clock started the moment you walked in. Also, a man who finds water leaks for a living turns out to be running a testing process most of us could learn something from.Chapters00:00 - Intro01:16 - Welcome: Energy levels and an idea for a future episode03:07 - A question from the audience03:51 - Shady’s question: Which QA domino do you push first?04:48 - One line answers FTW!06:04 - Rich maps the terrain08:24 - Vern does the not so obvious obvious thing10:12 - What’s the underlying problem?12:19 - How to choose between a quick win and a long-term play?13:55 - Instead of creating a master plan, do this instead.15:47 - Work like a… Drug dealer?!17:38 - Pickles19:44 - Because reasons21:05 - Rob Meaney thinks we have our priorities backwards24:01 - The colleague who argued against more test coverage, and won26:16 - Can you even prove the flaky automation is the problem?28:54 - GitHub's availability has never been worse. Rich has a theory why29:54 - Is Shady looking at a testing problem or a quality problem?31:12 - What happens when you tell them their problem isn't the problem32:50 - Education over illusion, and why "you're wrong" never lands36:18 - Does it matter that you can't name the technique you just used?37:24 - The page object question Rich asks, and the answer that ends the interview41:12 - Jonesy, a gambling machine, and the certificate that taught him nothing46:05 - The leak is never where the damage is47:14 - The leak hunter who checks the water company's homework first49:39 - Cars, doctors and solicitors are all playing 20 questions with you52:19 - The videos where he gets it wrong, and why testers never post those53:44 - Wrapping up, and a plea for more questionsLinks to stuff we mentioned during the pod:02:05 - Leigh RathboneLeigh's LinkedIn03:07 - Shady ZahranShady’s LinkedIn03:31 - Olly FairhallOlly's LinkedInOlly's Bluesky03:31 - Emily O’ConnorEmily's LinkedIn06:15 - The 10 P’s of TestabilityArticle on testability featuring the 10 PsThe book Team Guide to Software Testability by Ash Winter & Rob Meaney17:38 - The Prescott Pickle Principle from Jerry’s book The Secret’s of Consulting19:44 - “Things are the way they are because they got that way. Another one from The Secret’s of Consulting book!20:42 - The fairy tale The Emperor’s New Clothes by Hans Christian Andersen22:20 - Rob’s great article about how to prioritise our work called Most Product Development Teams Have Their Priorities Upside Down28:14 - Dan AshbyDan’s LinkedIn34:00 - Richard's automation and testing principles, including "education over illusion"37:24 - The page object model47:14 - This is Josh Pollard, the drain and leak specialist Richard follows on Instagram49:39 - Mat Armstrong, the car YouTuber from LeicesterVernon's newsletter Yeah But Does It Work?That's the answer we gave Shady, and we're fully prepared to be told we got it wrong.If you agree, let us know. If you disagree, let us know. If you violently agree or violently disagree, definitely let us know. Where would you start on day one in a new team, and what did it cost you when you started in the wrong place? Questions, comments and concerns are all welcome, and if you send us a question we will answer it on the show, same as we did for Shady.Like, subscribe, and share.

Rich reckons testers and QEs are the best positioned engineers of the next few years. Vern's question is whether a market that knows exactly what it wants also knows what it needs. Tell us which of us you think is closer, and why. If you violently agree or violently disagree, definitely tell us.Questions, comments, concerns, corrections, all of it is welcome, and the more of you who share what is actually happening where you work, the better a picture the rest of us get.Drop a comment on the post, drop a comment on the video, or come and find us on LinkedIn. And if you got something out of this one, like it, subscribe, and send it to the person you were arguing with about this last week.Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod:03:34 and 11:33 - Rich's LinkedIn post, the one this whole episode is built onRich's LinkedInRich's website26:09 - Vern's newsletter, Yeah, But Does It Work?30:02 and 37:52 - Steven DevonportSteve's comment on the post, and his follow up question about whether visibility and transparency are the currencies we should be spending35:17 - Exploratory data analysis40:28 - Huib Schoots40:46 - Keith KlainKeith's blog, Quality Remarks43:21 - Oracles and Evals46:59 - If you’re wondering the term “The Fat Controller” comes from, here’s the Wikipedia entry for Sir Topham Hatt49:51 - Rashik PrasadRashik's comment about wearing more hats50:58 - ELT stands for Executive Leadership Team aka The C-Suite. SLT is the Senior Leadership Team, the layer below55:26 - Jason SmithJason's comment about responsibility being distributed while accountability is not58:10 - The episode where we talked about quality coaches and specialists being distributed across teams1:00:48 - James Thomas, friend of the podJames's blog1:04:23 - Episode 34, 6 AI Tool Ideas That Will Transform How You Test, where tool idea #1 is the LLM that reads your tickets for you1:09:27 - The jagged frontierHelen Toner’s article Taking Jaggedness Seriously where I first heard the termThe paper where Ethan Mollick coined the termVernon Richards and Richard Bradshaw on the showThe Vernon Richard Show on LinkedIn and YouTube00:00 - Intro01:31 - ⚽️ Fresh World Cup wounds and new specs03:34 - Careful what you shout from the rooftops06:25 - The market is being very clear about what it wants08:11 - Wanting vs needing10:50 - Nobody enjoys writing test cases. Turns out that was practice11:33 - The post, read out in full13:38 - Rich joined that project as the AI QA and then…15:50 - Building an agent felt suspiciously familiar17:17 - "It's not my work": testing what the agent wrote18:23 - Some engineers have not adapted, and it is not a skills problem20:10 - The person on the project who found more bugs than Rich did22:20 - "I don't know what a dedicated QA would have done"24:09 - Two job numbers heading in opposite directions26:09 - More code, more surface area: the maths from Vern's newsletter28:06 - Why the model swore blind that Finnish was not on the list30:02 - Steven Devonport takes issue with the word evolving32:16 - Rich reckons most of the AI testing problem is old news35:17 - The AI crowd reinvented exploratory testing and gave it another name37:52 - Steve's tangent: which currency should we be spending?42:46 - When 70/30 drifts to 55/45, who makes the call?43:21 - We used to be handed our oracles45:28 - Vern's problem with calling it a black box46:59 - The Fat Controller heuristic (and his new name)48:56 - The prompt was still asking for values that no longer existed49:51 - Rashik Prasad: if everyone owns quality, who holds its shape?50:58 - What an AI first mandate actually does to a company52:45 - Everyone has hold of a different part of the elephant55:26 - Jason Smith: responsibility travels, accountability stays put56:29 - Four or five people changes more than you would think59:09 - Your pod is not the only pod1:01:12 - Responsible for the outcome, allowed to decide nothing1:02:46 - Ten factories became a hundred1:04:48 - The standards check nobody could build until now1:05:28 - Vern remembers what everyone did to the linters1:09:33 - Mostly right, most of the time, and the trap inside that1:10:46 - Why Rich is excited anyway1:12:05 - The market wants what it wants1:12:43 - Wrap up

Call to action - How are you proving you can actually use this stuff? Certs? Stories? A suspiciously long list of tools on your CV? We want to hear what the market is asking of you right now, especially if you're hiring or job hunting. And if your CV says "I use Copilot", ask yourself the question before Rich does: so what? Drop us a message on LinkedIn and let us know.AI is becoming an expectation rather than a differentiator. So if everyone is using it, how do you actually stand out?In this episode, Richard and Vernon discuss the changing job market, why simply saying "I use AI" no longer means much, and how to demonstrate real value in an industry that's changing faster than ever. From AI certifications and CVs to storytelling, trust, and communicating your impact, they explore what professionals should be focusing on next.**In this episode:*** Why AI is no longer enough to make you stand out* The return of certifications—and whether they matter* How to communicate your value beyond your CV* Why impact beats tool lists every time* Building with AI vs. building AI* The skills that will matter most in the years aheadIf you enjoyed the discussion, don't forget to like, subscribe, and let us know your thoughts in the comments. How are you proving your value in the age of AI?Chapters00:00 - Intro01:19 - Welcome (Tees, Tiles, Travel, and Trouwen)05:15 - Where should you place your bets right now?08:29 - Wait, certifications are back?11:50 - Do you still have your GCSEs on your CV?13:34 - The three flavours of AI work15:43 - Vern's guide to surviving the trust recession20:04 - The AI etiquette flip nobody announced21:27 - How to blow an opportunity in one DM26:05 - Here comes the trough of disillusionment29:53 - Rich's two-word CV test32:31 - Manual, skilled, or knowledge work? (Vern's ATD talk preview)35:58 - Testing has been rehearsing this for decades40:15 - CV bullets that make Rich want to interview you44:01 - How good at AI are you, really?46:05 - The four levels Vern pinched from Dan North48:30 - "It's my mission": how Rich works with AI51:30 - The skill nobody's talking about52:45 - Next time: who's looking after all these agents?58:10 - Wrap upLinks to stuff we mentioned during the pod01:31 - OfferZen (who are still around - yay!) sponsored one of the Let's Test events in South Africa. The speakers got a tee for presenting!I would love it if we could figure out a way to run Let's Test South Africa again because it was an incredible event…03:05 - Congratulations Beren and Elaine! ❤️Other notable guests from the software world included:Cassandra H. Leung (website and LI)Ard Kramer (LI)Zeger Van Hese (LI)Viola Korte (LI)Geert van de Lisdonk (who Vernon rudely didn't mention but can also be found on LI 🤦🏾‍♂️)05:47 - John CutlerJohn talks about Bets, Boards, Missions and North Stars from 2021 but if you want to read something more recent…… you should check out John's newsletterJohn's LinkedIn08:52 - Anthropic's certifications (or learnings at least)08:20 - Google's AI certifications (or learnings at least)BE ADVISED: These may not be the same ones Rich mentioned - YMMV!12:12 - Chris ArmstrongChris's blogChris's podcast The Testing Peers (of PeersCon fame!)Chris's YouTubeChris's LinkedIn21:27 - Gergely Orosz aka The Pragmatic EngineerHere's the post about AI-written messages and it turns out Gergely had another example of this happen more recently 😬The Pragmatic Engineer newsletterAlso, if by some miracle you're reading this Gergely, I've learned how to pronounce your name properly now 🤦🏾‍♂️🙏🏾 VR26:05 - The Gartner hype cycle (peak of inflated expectations, trough of disillusionment)32:20 - Vernon's talk at Agile Testing Days 2026 If Testers Had a Dragon's Den Pitch, Would Anyone Invest?Hit him up for a discount code!44:01 - An X post about how companies are talking about AI proficiency at the org level46:05 - Dan North's talk on dynamic teams and skill levelsIt turns out (because Dan) he's done several talks on this topic!There's this (the first one I watched and the one Vernon had in mind)… and you can see the levels part here but honestly watch the whole thing because it's greatThere's also this which is a bit more recent and he explains it differently to the first talk55:11 - OpenAI's article on harness engineering

The chaps dig into another Keithism to see where it takes them.Keith Klain published a blog post that drew a line in the sand for testers. His conclusion is blunt: there's a specific type of testing work that too many in our industry believe is our raison d'etre, while the market is rapidly reassessing its value (and not in a good way!).Chapters00:00 - Intro01:12 - Welcome (may contain traces of Premier League banter)03:00 - Who is Keith Klain and why should you listen to him?06:30 - Checking vs testing: what's the actual difference?12:00 - Keith's warning: AI is coming for the…12:56 - The CEO has one job…14:04 - …and they have two ways to do it15:31 - If your value isn’t the amount of tests you’ve executed, what is it?19:42 - Richard's updated AiT principle: shared understanding over assumed understanding23:53 - Shift left is more than "test the requirement first"27:18 - The ways your perceived value is constantly moving.31:57 - Maaike's stance: what if you refuse to use AI entirely?34:09 - Too big to fail? What AI investment really means for the industry39:53 - The skill no one taught testers that now matters most42:54 - "Become the insufferable AI person" and other survival tactics45:22 - Keith's call to action47:09 - Why no one at Test Coast said "risk" when asked why they test51:01 - AI summaries as input to other AI: the risk nobody designed for54:00 - How one bad step ruins everything55:27 - Statistics, Hugging Face, and the skills testers need to learn next57:43 - There’s more than one way to “be technical”59:54 - A rallying cry from Rich to the testing community01:04:00 - Forward-deployed engineers: just a QE by another name?Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod:03:00 - Keith KlainKeith's blog Quality RemarksThe blog post that triggered this episode: "Checking isn't testing. Soon it won't be employment either."Keith's LinkedIn19:33 - ELT stands for Executive Leadership Team aka The C-Suite. The folks who have job titles like Chief Executive Office (CEO), Chief Technology Officer (CTO), etc.20:00 - You can find Richard's AiT Principles hereAnd you can listen to his new ideas about those principles in Episode 33 “Six Principles of Automation in Testing: Still Relevant in 2026?”We’ll add a link to the talk as soon as we can27:18 - Vernon's Credibility Playbook27:18 - Vernon’s upcoming Agile Testing Days talk “If Testers Had a Dragon’s Den Pitch, Would Anyone Invest?”DM Vern if you’re interested in going as he might be able to help… 😉32:00 - Maaike's LinkedIn post Vernon referred to during the episodeYou should subscribe to her blog too34:14 - John CutlerJohn’s newsletterJohn’s LinkedIn37:26 - Simon WardleyIf you're not following Simon Wardley, please follow Simon Wardley! His work on Wardley Maps and situational awareness in strategy is essential readingSimon's LinkedIn46:38 - Rapid Software Testing (RST) is the methodology created by James Bach and Michael Bolton.47:12 - The Test Coast Conference where Richard delivered a keynote49:44 - Vidya Ranganathan’s fanbloodytastic post about the different kinds of risks we should be consideringVidya's LinkedIn56:48 - Hugging FaceThe Hugging Face websiteThe Wikipedia page

"Testing Is Not a Specialism" - You keep using that word…Vernon got triggered. A bold LinkedIn post declared "PSA: testing is not a specialism. Thank you for your time." Mic drop, walk off stage, no explanation. And it wasn't just one person. So Vernon did what any self-respecting tester would do: he asked why. And didn't get an answer. In this episode, Vernon and Richard dig into why some developers seem to find the idea of testing as a specialism genuinely laughable, what happens when you confuse a skill with a role, and why, in a world where everyone's building agentic workflows, nobody seems to notice that they're writing skills.md files full of testing knowledge. They also explore how AI is already reshaping what's expected of every role on a software team, why "knowing what good looks like" has never mattered more, and what skill stacking means for testers who want to stay ahead of the curve.Chapters00:00 - Intro01:17 - Vern's welcome rant01:42 - The topic: Is testing a specialism?07:17 - Rich gets a chance to speak 😅07:29 - Good Testers vs Bad Testers11:15 - Aren't we all developers now anyway?13:06 - There's testing and there's Testing15:01 - Testers communicating their value18:34 - If testing isn't a specialism, where does that leave agents and skills?20:30 - The lads cook up a new way to reframe the situation23:53 - Who should do testing?32:27 - Vern believes these folks are saying one thing and doing another35:02 - Rich wants to know what happens to the 0.5x Testers?40:02 - Skill Stacking45:36 - The thing most people haven't done but need to50:04 - Are we all Domain Translators now?54:23 - Wrap upLinks to stuff we mentioned during the pod:01:42 - Paul's interesting LinkedIn post that triggered Vernon03:34 - The question I asked on LinkedIn about why "people" get so triggered about testing as a role05:33 - Greg's interesting post about test management and levels of competence06:31 - Jade Rubick's post questioning whether QA should exist at all!10:46 - Angie Jones (the only thing Angie is terrible at is being terrible!)Angie's blogAngie's LinkedIn14:11 - The episode When Everything Sounds Like Testing… How Do You Explain What You Really Do?14:46 - Funnily enough, Vernon is giving this talk at Agile Testing Days 2026!It's called If Testers Had a Dragon's Den Pitch, Would Anyone Invest?DM Vernon if you would like a discount code for the conference!15:07 - The very cool GreaTest Quality Conference27:25 - Jason Bourne a fictional character from some of the best movies ever (especially the first two ^VR)28:29 - Anne-Marie CharrettThe excellent book in digital or physical versionsAnne-Marie's websiteBe sure to check out the blog which is no longer pay-walled 🥳Anne-Marie's LinkedIn28:29 - James BachThe Test Jumper description we refer toJames' blogJames' LinkedIn51:02 - Nate B. Jones (Shout out Martin for putting Vernon on to it 🙏🏾The post about developer roles mentioned in the episodeNate's newsletterNate's websiteNate's YouTubeNate's LinkedIn56:52 - Vernon did write Vernon Version 3 - Now with added AI! all about the skills he thinks he needs to develop going forwardsPlease like, subscribe, and share 😊 ^VRGot thoughts on whether testing is a specialism? We genuinely want to hear from you. Vernon still doesn't have an answer to his question. Run it past a friendly developer and let us know what they say. Drop us a message on LinkedIn and if Paul or Greg are listening, the invitation to come on the pod is very much open.

In this episode, Richard and Vernon explore the evolving concept of automation in quality, especially in the context of AI and Gen AI. They discuss how new technologies are blurring the lines between testing and quality, and what this means for the future of software development and testing practices.00:00 - Intro00:52 - Welcome and weekly catch-up01:11 - Vern's deep dive into the AI rabbit hole02:39 - Rich’s quit(er) work week, new threads, and dentists04:15 - Richard buys a domain and we started the pod proper06:09 - Tool idea #1: Using an LLM to evaluate user stories and acceptance criteria automatically07:35 - Is analysing a story "testing" or "quality"? The ISTQB static analysis debate10:27 - Vernon's diabetes analogy: AI is forcing us to finally do what we always said we should12:19 - Better stories = better testing: how quality work amplifies everything downstream13:11 - Tool idea #2: "If we made this change, what areas of the system would be impacted?"14:23 - Distilling years of system knowledge into 5–10 questions an agent could ask18:37 - Tool idea #3: The PR Analyser — summarising code changes through a testing and quality lens21:45 - Vernon's "1 unit of effort, 5 units of testing" — the quality multiplier effect23:29 - Comparing story analysis to actual implementation: where did understanding diverge?24:43 - Tool idea #4: Dynamic test selection — cherry-picking the right tests to run first27:05 - Tool idea #5: An agent that analyses failed builds and attempts to fix them27:28 - Why Richard's first attempt always "fixed" the test instead of the code (and what was missing)29:21 - Dan's AI agents: one thinking partner, one employee monitoring production32:42 - The documentation goldmine: why AI-generated RCA notes might matter more than the fix33:39 - Tool idea #6: A holistic quality dashboard pulling insights across stories, code, tests, and process36:43 - John Cutler on context: it's not data you pass around — it's formed through interaction40:43 - More options than ever: whether it's testing, quality, or static analysis — you can do it differently now41:56 - The real skill: spotting the opportunity to make yourself more effective42:30 - Ge Hill's Lump of Code Fallacy and why task analysis matters43:34 - Why Richard got into automation: efficiency, not because he was told to45:03 - Vernon's big question: in a world where agents can do everything, what's your performance review about?46:52 - Context, craft, and product knowledge can't be delegated to tools yet48:29 - Call to action: What are you building? What tools couldn't you build before that you can now?49:29 - Upcoming: Test Automation Days and PeerCon Live in NottinghamLinks to stuff we mentioned during the pod:04:15 - Automation in QualityRichard bought the automationinquality.com domain! The concept explored throughout this episode.05:28 - Kalpesh Sodha aka KalpsShout out to Richard's colleague who played devil's advocate on the "is it testing or quality?" question07:31 - Static analysis29:44 - Dan "The Agile Guy" ElliottHis post about how he uses AI agents as a "thinking partner" and an "employee" with different missions and capabilitiesDan’s websiteDan's LinkedIn36:52 - John CutlerJohn Cutler's piece on how context isn't just data you move around — it's formed through interaction between peopleJohn's newsletterJohn's LinkedIn42:37 - Rob SabourinMy quick Perplexity search for Rob's public material on Task AnalysisRob's Linkedin42:45 - Michael “GeePaw” HillHis Lump of Code Fallacy. The idea that coding isn't just one activity — there are three flavours of work that occur when you codeMichael’s websiteMichaels Mastadon49:35 - Test Automation DaysRichard will be keynoting at Test Automation DaysMake sure you say hi if you’re there50:10 - PeersConVernon and Richard will be recording a live episode at PeersCon!If you're there, come say hi and grab a mic 🎙️

In this episode, Richard Bradshaw and Vernon discuss the relevance and application of the six principles of automation in testing in the context of AI advancements. They explore how these principles hold up in 2026, the challenges faced in automation, and the future of testing strategies.00:00 - Intro01:47 - Welcome (Richard is not at home 👀)02:07 - Ramadan, cooking without tasting, and plastic teeth 🦷04:01 - Today's topic: revisiting the AiT principles ahead of a keynote04:58 - What is Automation in Testing (AiT)?06:49 - Principle 1: Supporting Testing over Replicating Testing07:01 - Vernon's take: testing is a performance, not a click sequence08:22 - What the industry promised vs what automation actually does08:49 - The serendipity you lose when a human isn't testing09:59 - Agentic testing: observing more, but still not replicating humans10:56 - The danger of anthropomorphising AI output12:10 - LLMs always give an answer — and that's the problem13:03 - Principle 2: Testability over Automatability13:14 - Vernon's take: narrow vs broad — operate, control, observe14:38 - Making apps automatable for the robots but not the humans15:37 - The shiniest framework in a broken testing context16:40 - If it's testable, it's probably automatable — but not vice versa16:55 - Automation strategy vs testing strategy: when they compete, everyone loses17:46 - The problem has always been testing, not automation19:57 - Principle 3: Testing Expertise over Coding Expertise20:18 - Vernon's take: testing expertise lets you leverage the tools21:47 - The spoonfed tests problem: great at automating, lost without guidance22:36 - The "code school" era: everyone told to learn to code22:51 - Coding agents have changed the maths on this26:01 - The new nuance: test design and framework knowledge over writing the code28:44 - Evaluating code is a testing problem — and LLMs can help you do it30:43 - Are agents as good as a junior developer?31:42 - Outcome Engineering (O16G) and the race to write the AI principles32:13 - Simon Wardley: we're in the wild west again33:22 - Principle 4: Problems over Tools33:29 - Vernon's take: the hammer and the nail34:07 - Don't let your problems be shaped by the framework you have34:36 - New automation opportunities beyond testing: PRs, logs, story review35:30 - Principle 5: Risk over Coverage36:12 - Vernon's take: 100% coverage ≠ 100% risk coverage38:00 - The one test case, one automated test fallacy39:04 - Where in the system is the risk? Do you even know your layers?39:49 - Probabilistic vs non-deterministic: refining the language around AI40:53 - Coverage as intentional vs coverage as a number someone picked once43:15 - Principle 6: Observability over Understanding43:24 - Vernon's take: just-in-time understanding vs reading everything upfront44:12 - What the principle was actually about: making automation results observable47:00 - Does this principle belong in testing, or has it grown into quality?49:00 - So... what's missing?50:00 - The four pillars: Strategy, Creation, Usage, and Education57:05 - Automation in Quality: the bigger opportunity01:01:00 - Wrap up + Vern's Lead Dev panelLinks to stuff we mentioned during the pod:04:00 - Automation in Testing (AiT)The principles live at automationintesting.comAiT was co-created by Richard Bradshaw and Mark Winteringham04:00 - Test Automation DaysThe conference where Richard is giving his keynote — testautomationdays.com24:48 - James ThomasThe "kid in a candy shop" himself — James's blog and LinkedIn31:42 - Outcome Engineering (016G)The article Richard shared before recording — worth tracking down if you're interested in where agentic development practices are heading32:13 - Simon WardleyIf you're not following Simon Wardley, please follow Simon Wardley! His work on Wardley Maps and situational awareness in strategy is essential readingSimon's LinkedIn43:30 - Abby BangserVern's go-to person for all things observability. Abby's LinkedIn46:04 - Noah SusmanAs it turns out, the quote Vern's referencing: advanced monitoring as "indistinguishable from testing" was not by Noah! It was Ed Keyes at GTAC 2007.Noah's blog and LinkedIn59:30 - Angie JonesVern's been reading Angie's work on testing AI-enabled applications here and here.Angie's website and LinkedIn01:01:30 - The Lead Dev panel Vernon will be part of"How to Measure the Business Impact of AI" — happening 25th February, free to sign up01:02:00 - Richard's Selenium Conf talk"Redefining Test Automation" — the talk that the Test Automation Days keynote is shaping up to be a spiritual successor to. 

This was supposed to be about testing.Instead, it turned into a conversation about burnout, money, leadership, community, AI, and what it actually takes to build a sustainable life in tech.Richard and Vernon kick off 2026 reflecting on what they’re changing, what they’re rebuilding, and how testing and quality fit into a future shaped by intention rather than hustle.Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod:05:19 - The Malazan Book of the Fallen by Steven Erikson14:59 - The $1k Challenge by Ali Abdaal Vernon took part in last year17:23 - The video from Daniel Pink on how to have a successful yearHere's where Daniel talks about having a Challenger Network (but the whole video is 😙🤌🏾)18:46 - Toby SinclairToby's websiteToby's LinkedIn19:24 - Keith KlainKeith's blogKeith's podcastKeith's LinkedIn19:25 - Agile Testing Days conference35:45 - What is Model Drift?41:06 - Glue workTanya's Glue Work presentation which you can read or watchVernon's talk about how glue work impacts Quality Engineers, Testers, etc.48:06 - Gary "GaryVee" VaynerchukGary's websiteGary's YouTube00:00 - Intro00:54 - Greetings & where have we been?01:32 - The holidays02:34 - Rest & mood04:00 - Routines for success05:59 - Push-up challenge!08:35 - Dopamine detox10:28 - THE EPISODE BEGINS!10:29 - What are our personal 2026 themes (rather than resolutions)?10:59 - Rich's 2026 themes13:10 - Vern's themes17:58 - Friendship, loneliness, and being the initiator21:28 - Rich has a two itches. One about writing...21:56 - ...and another about hats25:23 - Vern's leadership focus and testing foundations31:06 - AI work: data mindset, agents, and the vibe coding divide40:11 - Rant about AI testing being stuck in the past46:37 - Do "cool" shit and "talk" about it. How to stand out from AI Slop50:10 - Our podcast themes for 2026

In this episode of the Vernon and Richard show, the hosts engage in light-hearted banter about football before diving into a deep discussion on QA, QE, and testing. They explore the concept of 'shift left' in software development, comparing its application in agile versus waterfall methodologies. The conversation shifts to the evolving roles of QA and QE in the context of AI's impact on the industry, emphasizing the importance of task analysis and building a quality culture within teams. The episode concludes with reflections on managing expectations in QA roles and the future of jobs in the field.00:00 - Intro00:48 - Welcome and "Hey" (may contain traces of ⚽️)04:45 - Olly's first question: Does shift left lend itself more to waterfall (than other methodologies)?14:41 - Olly's second question: Does this limit how much agile can be used? Is there potentially a new methodology that can emerge from this?22:31 - Olly's third question (remixed by Rich a little): "...is it more now a case of making people aware that they can, should be considering things ahead of development?"34:24 - Olly's fourth question: How far can you shift-left before it becomes overstepping?51:53 - Olly's... which question is this now?! Next question! That works!: Where does the QA role end?Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod:04:26 - Olly FairhallOlly's LinkedInHere's a link to what Olly sent us04:45 - Waterfall (in software development)Wikipedia article about the history of the term This article goes into a little more detail about the different phases and characteristics of the model 07:29 - Dan Ashby's (yes DAN'S!) famous diagram is part of his often cited "Continuous Testing" post07:50 - For folks who don't understand that reference, it's... taken (🥁) scene from the movie Taken08:10 - Rich's Whiteboard used to get a lot more love😞 22:31 - Olly's questions and thoughts that are guiding our conversation. Thanks Olly!44:12 - The book "Who Not How" by Dan Sullivan and Dr. Benjamin Hardy46:33 - Elisabeth HendricksonGet Elisabeth's excellent book Explore It!Elisabeth's LinkedIn46:49 - Alan PageAlan's newsletterAlan and Brent's podcastAlan's LinkedIn51:53 - Kelsey HightowerKelsey did a Q&A at Cloud Native PDX and you can listen to the question and answer I was trying to describe here.I urge you to listen to the whole thing. Kelsey is an excellent orator, storyteller, and all-around human ❤️55:33 - Rob SabourinMy quick Perplexity search for Rob's public material on Task AnalysisRob's Linkedin56:59 - Vernon's newsletter "Yeah But Does it Work?!"The issue mentioned is called "What Is The Vaughn Tan Rule and How Does It Impact Testing?" and talks about where we might start with unbundling