Manual vs. Automated: Which UAT Testing Method Is Best?

User Acceptance Testing (UAT) is the conclusion of the program improvement lifecycle, upon which the ultimate yield is tried from its point of see of the conclusion user. This stage helps guarantee that the program fulfills client needs and meets company standards. Both human and computerized strategies have preferences and impediments when executing UAT. This web journal covers the positives, negatives, and suitable utilization of both mechanized and manual UAT forms and makes a difference in deciding the strategy that best suits your needs.

Table of Content

Understanding UAT

Before software goes live, end users test it using a process called user acceptance testing (UAT) to make sure it matches their needs and expectations. UAT places an intense focus on usability, client experience, and execution, in response to previous testing phases that were more concerned with specialized viewpoint and functionality.

Manual UAT

Manual UAT involves end-users or testers manually interacting with the software. This method is more personal and subjective, often used to evaluate user experience, interface usability, and real-world scenarios that automated tests might not fully replicate.

Advantages of Manual UAT

1. Human Insight: Manual UAT captures the qualitative aspects of user experience that automated tests might miss. Users can provide feedback on the intuitiveness of the interface, overall satisfaction, and any usability issues they encounter.

2. Flexibility: Manual testing can quickly adapt to changes in the software. If new features are added or requirements change, testers can easily adjust their testing approach without needing to rewrite automated scripts.

3. Exploratory Testing: Exploratory testing supports testers to interact with the software in an unscripted way, probably finding underlying issues that arranged test cases can detect. This type of testing is extremely useful for discovering unplanned defects and errors with the user experience.

4. Contextual Understanding: Manual testing allows for the assessment of software in real-world contexts. Testers can evaluate how the software performs under various conditions, such as different devices or environments, which automated tests might not fully simulate.

Disadvantages of Manual UAT

1. Time-consuming: Manual UAT can be challenging, particularly for highly loaded and complex applications. Analyzers got to physically wrap up each test case, which can be expensive and time-consuming.

2. Subject to Human Error: Manual processes are prone to inconsistencies and errors, such as forgetting test steps or misinterpreting requirements. These errors can impact the reliability of test results.

3. Limited Reusability: Once a manual test case is executed, it cannot be reused easily. For regression testing or repeated cycles, the process needs to be repeated, which can be inefficient and costly.

4. Scalability Issues: As applications grow in complexity and size, manual testing becomes less practical. It can be challenging to manage and execute comprehensive test suits manually.

CTA (2).webp

Automated UAT

Automated UAT involves using software tools and scripts to execute predefined test cases. This approach is suited for scenarios requiring repetitive testing, large volumes of data, or continuous integration.

Advantages of Automated UAT

1. Efficiency & Speed: Without having to for human intervention, automation testing can be performed speedily and repeatedly. Because of the huge amount of test cases in large processes, manual testing would be impractical. This is very helpful in certain situations.

2. Consistency and Reliability: Automated tests follow predefined scripts precisely, which ensures consistent test execution. This decreases inconstancy and upgrades the unwavering quality of test comes about.

3. Reusability: Computerized test scripts can be reused over distinctive forms of the program. This is often particularly valuable for regression testing, where the same tests need to be run each time the computer program is updated.

4. Scalability: Automated testing can handle extensive test suites and large data sets efficiently. It scales well with application growth, making it suitable for enterprise-level applications and continuous testing environments.

Disadvantages of Automated UAT

1. Starting Setup Costs: Creating and keeping automated test scripts requires significant upfront investment in terms of time and assets. This includes purchasing testing devices, creating scripts, and setting up test situations.

2. Limited Flexibility: Automated tests are rigid and follow predefined paths. They may not adapt well to changes in requirements or explore new features that were not anticipated during script development.

3. Support Overhead: Automated tests require continuous maintenance to keep up with changes within the application. This will include updating test scripts, managing test environments, and troubleshooting issues with the automation system.

4. Wrong Positives/Negatives: Automated tests can create false positives or negatives if not appropriately designed

Choosing the Best Method

Selecting the suitable UAT method depends on a few factors, including the complexity of the application, budget limitations, frequency of testing, and the scope of test coverage required.

Components to Consider

1. Application Complexity: For complex applications with numerous features and frequent upgrades, automated testing might be more appropriate due to its effectiveness and adaptability. Conversely, simpler applications or those in the early stages might benefit from manual testing’s flexibility and human insight.

2. Budget and Resources: Manual UAT may be preferable for projects with limited budgets, as it requires fewer initial investments. Purchasing automated testing solutions can be beneficial for projects with sufficient funding and an emphasis on long-term effectiveness.

3. Frequency of Testing: Applications that require frequent testing, such as those undergoing continuous integration or continuous delivery (CI/CD), will benefit from automation testing service speed and effectiveness.

4. Test Coverage and Scope: Automated testing is ideal for scenarios requiring extensive test coverage and regression testing. Manual testing Service, on the other hand, excels in evaluating user experience, usability, and edge cases where human judgment is critical.

CTA2 (7).webp

Combining Both Approaches

For best outcomes, a hybrid strategy that combines automated and manual UAT is frequently used. To guarantee thorough testing and the highest possible level of software quality, this approach makes use of the advantages of both approaches.

Best Practices for a Hybrid Approach

1. Define Clear Objectives: Clearly delineate the roles of manual and automated testing. While human tests may examine usability and exploratory scenarios, automated tests can concentrate on regression and functionality.

2. Integrate Testing Tools: Use testing tools that support both manual and automated testing to streamline processes and ensure comprehensive test coverage. This can also facilitate better collaboration between different testing teams.

3. Regularly Survey and Update: Continuously review and update both automated test scripts and manual test cases to reflect

changes within the application and advancing client necessities. This guarantees that all viewpoints of the program are effectively tested.

4. Ensure Collaboration: Cultivate collaboration between teams responsible for manual and automated testing. Sharing bits of knowledge and input can help recognize gaps in the testing handle and upgrading generally test scope.

5. Receive a Risk-Based Approach: Prioritize testing based on hazard and affect. Utilize computerized tests for high-risk and as often as possible tested areas, whereas use manual testing for basic client involvement scenarios and areas requiring human judgment.

Case Studies and Real-World Examples

To further illustrate the effectiveness of both methods, consider the following case studies:

1. Case Study: eCommerce Platform - An eCommerce platform with frequent updates and a large user base opted for automated UAT to handle regression testing and high-volume transactions. The computerized tests guaranteed that unused highlights did not disturb existing functionalities. Manual testing was utilized for assessing client encounters and exploratory testing, which uncovered convenience issues not distinguished by computerization.

2. Case Study: Monetary Application - A money related application with complex trade logic and strict administrative requirements utilized a hybrid approach. Automated tests were employed for functional and regression testing, while manual tests focused on compliance, user experience, and edge cases. This approach ensured both functional accuracy and adherence to regulatory standards.

Conclusion

Both manual and automated UAT methods offer valuable benefits and come with their own set of limitations. The choice for selecting one of them, or to make use of a hybrid process, depends on different factors, such the complexity of the application, the fundamental extend of coverage, testing frequency, and budget. You'll be able arrive at an educated choice that meets your needs and guarantees the conveyance of a high-quality program that fulfills client desires and trade objectives by being mindful of the focal points and impediments of each approach.

Whether you decide on manual testing for its human knowledge or robotized testing for its effectiveness, or a combination of both, the extreme objective is to guarantee that the program is vigorous, user-friendly, and prepared for generation.

About Author

Renuka ThakorAs a Test Analyst at PixelQA, Renuka Thakor commenced her journey in the IT industry in 2021. Progressing from a manual tester, she refined her testing techniques and embraced tools for enhanced productivity.

Her commitment to staying abreast of the evolving testing landscape through continuous learning aligns with her future goal of transitioning into an automation testing position.