Skip to main content

Dumb questions and not getting lost from your route

There's a saying in Finnish "Kysyvä ei tieltä eksy". In English it might translate into "Man asking for directions does not get lost from his route." I really like that saying.

Another more famous one is "There are no dumb questions". I disagree with this one.

There are dumb questions, and you cannot avoid them. Asking good questions, the right questions, at the right time, from the right source, and in the right way, is really hard. That's pretty much what testing is about. Asking, learning from the answers, and educating others based on the answers.

As an example a dumb question would be one that:
- is asked at the wrong time
- is asked from the wrong source
- is not answered
- provides no information for anybody
- takes a lot of effort to ask, and provides very little value
- is asked just for the sake of wanting to ask - you shouldn't want to ask, you should want to ask so that you can hear the response 
- does not help you to invent better questions
At least these come quickly to my mind.

Problem is, that often you don't know whether the question you are asking is a dumb or a clever one until after you hear the answer. (Perhaps that's the point of the saying?)

After my switch to Philips, I have had to ask a lot of questions. Some awful, some better, all too many and at the same time all too few. It is basically trying to balance between not getting lost on my route, and not wasting too much of other peoples time by asking too many too silly questions. It is a hard one to balance on.

I've been a huge advocate of questioning. Everything. Everyone. Every time. And still am, because a man asking for directions, even with stupid questions, does not get lost from his route.

He might get mugged though, but that's the risk you gotta take :)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Testers doing test automation - is that the most important thing for you to do right now?

I've been thinking quite a lot about tester's moving to do test automation.  Lately beause of these three things: 1.  European testing conference , a great testing conference I attended couple of weeks ago. It is very cool due to many things; the way the speakers get compensated, the focus on the conferring side of conferences making it very easy for people to discuss stuff, the way the talks are chosen, and because there are also a lot of developers joining. So anyway when I was talking with several of the attendees, it was a bit strange how it was easier for me to talk about the product development as a whole with the developers, where as with the testers it more naturally moved into talk of automation and tools. Also on the open space, I think the majority of the topics pitched was automation or tool related. And quite little on the process or on the customer facing side of product development.  2. In my company there are a lot of different products and...

Testing drunk

(My first blog writing ever.) I've been thinking a long time that it's funny how many bugs I find by accident. Try to do something, make a mistake and boom - a bug is found.  Making the mistakes intentionally doesn't quite work - that's why they are called accidents I guess.. So I've thought of ways to make myself more prone to accidents, coming up with an apparent one; testing drunk. TUI (testing under the influence). So this I gotta try. More to come on that later.

Six reasons why testers should do code reviews

I have had quite a lot of discussions about code reviews. Quite many also with testers, by which I have understood that many do not do those. I will not start arguing here on whether code reviews are good/important or not. But I will list a few things why I think testers would benefit of doing them. 1. Code is the only documentation that is up to date . If you really want to know how something really functions, you want to be able to see and read the code. 2. Knowing more about the thing done enables you to do better testing . You can spot things that you should definitely test, and things that you probably don't need to test that much. Like extra things added by coder, usage&modifications of existing functions, data types, etc. And to arguments thinking that one loses their "independence" as a tester by knowing too much, I would worry a lot less about that than about testing stuff that you have no idea on how it has been built. 3. Improve logging . I obse...