Some myths persist in quality assurance (QA). At the end of the year, we want to finally confront outdated beliefs that block the path to efficient QA. From the assumption that QA only matters at the end of a project to the belief that test automation solves all problems, all these assumptions are unfounded. This article takes a look at the three biggest QA myths that we should bury for good in 2025.
Myth: ‘Automation replaces manual testing!’
Automated tests are undoubtedly an indispensable tool to complete recurring tasks efficiently and to ensure comprehensive test coverage for large projects. Nevertheless, the myth that automation completely replaces manual testing is incorrect. Efficient testing is still dependent on human expertise, especially for complex scenarios, unclear requirements or creative solutions to problems. Because these often remain undetectable by automated test procedures. According to a study by Forrester in 2023, at least 40 % of tests must be carried out manually, as they require special intuition and adaptability that only humans can provide. Especially when it comes to accessibility testing, it turns out that only about 20% can be automated - the rest requires human testers to ensure that software is accessible to all users.1
Why manual tests are irreplaceable:
|
Intuition and creativity Only human testers can simulate unusual scenarios or take the perspective of the end user to identify potential problems that automated tests wouldn't see. |
|
User experience (UX) |
|
Exploratory tests |
|
Sense of purpose |
💡 Tip: The most successful QA strategies rely on a combination of automated testing and the skills of experienced testers. Tools such like Selenium, Cypress and Appium enable efficient automation, while exploratory testing and UX analyses offer the crucial human perspective to improve unforeseen problems and user experiences.
1: Forrester. (2023). Predictions 2023: Automation and robotics. Link: https://www.forrester.com/report/predictions-2023-automation-and-robotics/RES178243
Myth: ‘QA is only important at the end of the development cycle!’
According to a study by IBM Systems Sciences Institute, the cost of fixing a bug that is discovered after product release is 4 to 5 times higher than the cost of a bug that is identified during the development phase. In the maintenance phase, these costs can even be up to 100 times higher.
Figure: Relative costs of error elimination
Source: Own illustration based on IBM Systems Sciences Institute3
The study shows that fixing bugs in the maintenance phase is up to 100 times more expensive than in the design phase. This underlines the importance of recognizing and fixing bugs as early as possible to avoid high rework costs. Early integration of tests will not only improve software quality, but also increase the efficiency of the entire project.
💡 Tip: Integrate testing into the development process as early as possible (‘shift left’). Start with code reviews, requirements analyses and initial tests right from the planning phase. Use continuous integration/continuous deployment (CI/CD) to enable continuous testing and early feedback. Tools like Jenkins or GitLab CI/CD make it easier to integrate testing seamlessly into the development cycle.
3: Dawson, M. / Burrell, D. / Rahim, E./ Brewster, S.(2010). Journal of Information Systems Technology and Planning. 3. Page 49-53.
Myth: ‘A test that has once successfully identified errors will always remain meaningful!’
This is not true. Repetitive tests lose their effectiveness over time, as the framework conditions of the test object are constantly changing. New content elements on a website or changes in the architecture of an application can result in old tests that do not cover all relevant scenarios.
Using old tests without adapting them is counterproductive because they do not reflect real-life conditions. A study by Tricentis shows that 64% of tests in traditional QA environments are ineffective, which not only wastes resources but also makes the test phase unnecessarily long.
What really matters:
- Prioritization: Start by testing the features that are crucial for the functionality or security of the software.
- Update: Tests need to be regularly adapted to stay abreast of changing conditions and maintain their efficiency.
- Supplement: New tests can become necessary to comprehensively cover changes to the test object.
💡 Tip: A well designed test strategy combines unit tests, which check individual sections of code, with integration tests, which ensure the interaction of different modules.In addition, a risk-based test design should be used to check the most critical areas to minimize the biggest risks.
Conclusion
The myths surrounding quality assurance (QA) are more than just misconceptions - they can massively hinder progress and quality in software development. By critically questioning these myths and exposing their weaknesses, we create the basis for a founded, fact-based QA strategy. This enables us to not only optimize processes, but also promote innovative approaches and make a sustainable contribution to the quality of modern software.
You are facing a challenge in your QA? Then book a free consultation and tell us about your problem.
