Better Software - December 2008 - (Page 31)

black hat Black represents darkness and allows us to be careful and cautious—without being overly negative. The black hat helps us identify things that might be incorrect, might go wrong, and might be risky or dangerous, which is particularly useful in software testing. The black hat taps into our natural fears about safety and security and helps us voice our concerns without their being viewed as negative or unhelpful. The Six Thinking Hats in Testing Here are some examples of using the six thinking hats in testing: • Improving our working relationships • Reviewing documents and code • Designing test cases • Assessing the product • Discussing release readiness blue hat With the blue hat, we think about our thinking, define our purpose, control the use of other hats, and set out the next steps. In a group, the blue hat may be worn permanently by the facilitator. iMProving our Working relationshiPs Software development may become adversarial when groups blame each other for problems and delays. For instance, the classic “If you’d given us better specs, we wouldn’t have had grown quickly, work globally, and have teams with a high degree of autonomy in their software development practices. The six thinking hats are useful when performing code reviews. Use the black hat to identify events the code might not handle properly, the yellow hat to look for positive aspects of the code, the white hat when assessing the corresponding unit tests, and the green hat to collect new and exciting ideas for testing and improving the code. designing test cases Generally our testing fits within a larger context—that of shipping working, desirable software cost effectively and on time. One standard prac- “A key skill is the ability to review artifacts related to software development. We may review material ranging from rough requirements documents to thousands of lines of source code to test cases. Sadly, we are often less effective than we’d like to be.” When group members use the blue hat, individuals can make procedural suggestions—for example, which hat to use next. Participants may also use the blue hat to clarify points, such as “Is that a white hat comment or a red hat comment you’re making?” to spend an extra three weeks and $100,000 trying to find out what the users really wanted.” By using the six thinking hats, we can disentangle facts from emotions (white and red hats) in order to present careful and cautious views (black hat) balanced by a mix of positive thinking (yellow hat) and creative suggestions to improve things (green hat). And with our blue hats we can consider the “bigger picture” of how our work fits with the project and company objectives. tice is risk-based testing—evaluating risks in order to decide what, how, how much, and when to test. We can improve our understanding of the risks and thus design appropriate tests using the six thinking hats throughout the process. Each hat helps improve the effectiveness and appropriateness of the resulting tests. The mind map in figure 1 provides examples of questions created by viewing the problem from the perspective of each hat. a Final note about hats Although we might be tempted to categorize someone as emotional or negative, we need to resist the urge to do so. Rather, we need to encourage people to try out each hat so they can contribute more fully to the goals and objectives of the team. Everyone needs to use any and all of the hats. We can use the hats individually or in groups. When used in a group, every member of the group uses the same color simultaneously before the group switches to another color. Tip: I use inexpensive, colored baseball caps (less than $15 for a set of six) in group situations to help us keep focused on the current hat. By using a common color, the group can be much more focused and productive. revieWing docuMents and code A key skill is the ability to review artifacts related to software development. We may review material ranging from rough requirements documents to thousands of lines of source code to test cases. Sadly, we are often less effective than we’d like to be. The thinking hats allow us to review the material from six distinct perspectives. At Google, code reviews are a common practice that helps us maintain a high standard of working software, even though we have www.StickyMinds.com assessing the Product The following case study provides an example where the project team reviewed some new software prior to accepting it from the supplier. A small software testing consultancy commissioned a new version of its Web site to be developed by another company. The consultancy was responsible for user acceptance testing (UAT) and used de Bono’s six thinking hats as part of the UAT process. The initial review, including an introduction to the hats DECEMBER 2008 BETTER SOFTWARE 31 http://www.StickyMinds.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Better Software - December 2008

Better Software - December 2008 Contents Mark Your Calendar Contributors eLightenment Technically Speaking Code Craft Test Connection Management Chronicles What's a Manager to Do? Six Thinking Hats for Testers The Key to Good Interviewing 2008 Salary Survey Product Announcements 10 Things You Might Not Know About … The Last Word Ad Index

Better Software - December 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.