Automation testing is essential to ensure software quality in a rapidly evolving Agile system. To detect flaws early and deploy quicker, companies are investing extensively in automation testing. The procedure normally begins with recruiting qualified testers, forming an automation team, and constructing an automatic framework utilizing the many tools and frameworks.
This investment can go to waste without a mechanism to monitor automation and its efficiency. Test automation metrics and KPIs form an important tool for determining your income from any investment, help in understanding and improving the components of your test automation.
The development of a correct set of metrics is an important stage for the QA automation testing transition. To measure if your firm gets an agreeable value by investing in test automation, you have to rely on well-selected performance metrics.
Important Metrics For Automation Testing
There is no set of ‘universal metrics’ reports working in every capacity all the time because one statistic could be better than the other in any context and situation. Everything depends on the situation and what you want to do. Several aspects of your organization must be taken into account to find a way to assess the value and impact of your automation efforts for the company. A few of the metrics for automation testing are:
Number of defects found in testing
A basic indicator of how bad a software release is relative to previous releases is the proportion of valid faults detected during the trial execution phase. For predictive modelling, the number of flaws identified might be useful to estimate the predicted residual problems under certain coverage levels. You can also use defect containment efficiency to gauge test efficacy. The larger the proportion – the more effective the test set.
Time saved
Investing in automation has significantly reduced testing time, allowing teams to release at a faster and more confident pace. Time saved is a reasonable indicator for validating automation measures since “time saved equals money saved.” This indicator provides an answer to ‘How much time and effort did test automation save us?’.
The difference between the time required for Manual Execution and the time required for Automated Execution is Time Saved. Fragility is also considered in time Saved because maintaining and updating scripts requires a significant amount of time.
Equivalent Manual Test Effort (EMTE)
‘Equivalent Manual Test Effort’ shows the advantages of automated tests against the time needed to manually perform the same tests. As its name suggests, the advantages of automated testing against manual tests may be measured. For those who are running both human and automated testing, these metrics become necessary. And for those who have lately moved to automation, too. Test case ‘Manual Test Effort Equivalent’ EMTE is the effort you have to put in manually while operating the case. This is the answer to ‘How much work would it take without automation to manually carry out the same tests?’
The number of risks mitigated
Testing should be prioritized according to the risks. Unpredictable business happenings, defect-prone elements of the application, or any previous or future occurrences that could harm the project are examples of these risks.
Ranking hazards from high to low priority is an excellent way to measure automation success concerning the risk. Then, based on risk prioritization, automate test cases and measure the range of risks that have been addressed by automation testing.
Number of Tests execution
This metric represents the total number of tests run during a build. It’s critical to know whether the automated tests were adequate. For easy understanding of the status, graphs and charts can indicate the total executions classed as succeeded, failed, halted, unfinished, and so forth.
Finally, success is determined by automation’s capacity to achieve the objectives you put forth. It’s critical to keep track of your progress at all times. A good metric should be straightforward, realistic to evaluate, and accurate. Most significantly, it should assist you in identifying areas where automation could be improved.
Ease of use of the automated framework or tests
Teams sometimes overlook that automated tests must be low-maintenance, easy to run by anyone, have simple and understandable code, and provide extensive information about the tests they run, including completed and failed tests, logs, visual dashboards, screenshots, and more. This is a great metric for determining whether or not the automation attempt was successful. Although it is a subjective metric, the data has a significant impact on teams.
All of these indicators must be tailored to the project’s unique circumstances; there is no such thing as a “one-size-fits-all” solution. They do, however, assist teams in shifting their focus away from arbitrary numbers and the amount of time consumed and toward the use of automated testing.
Author BIO
Kamal Singh is a technical expert, a passionate writer, and a seasoned IT professional who is working with Devstringx, a best react js web development company. His role includes overall quality assessment and business development for Devstringx. He also holds in-depth knowledge of IT outsourcing services and remote hiring of developers.
