Advertise on podcast: Testing Peers

We've all had ideas that we thought were brilliant, only to be met with silence, indifference or a room full of questions we weren't quite ready to answer. So how do we get people on board with our ideas, and do we always need to? In this episode, Chris, Ben, Rachel and Russell explore the challenges of getting buy-in, sparked by Ben's own experiences of sharing ideas before they're fully formed. What starts as a conversation about cutting through the noise develops into a discussion about influence, experimentation, collaboration and knowing when to let an idea go. Along the way, we discuss: Finding the signal in the noise: Sharing ideas, testing their value and recognising which ones deserve more attention.Knowing your audience: Understanding what matters to others, choosing the right moment and framing ideas in ways that resonate.Experimentation over commitment: How small, reversible experiments can make it easier for people to embrace change.Sharing ownership: Creating opportunities for others to contribute ideas and shape solutions, rather than always providing the answers.Making space for different voices: The value of asynchronous communication, psychological safety and giving people time to think.Knowing when to persist or pause: Why some ideas need a different approach, while others might benefit from a little time on the shelf.The cost of getting it wrong: How excluding people from decisions can damage trust, even when the intentions are good.We also explore whether every idea really needs widespread support, how leaders can encourage a culture of experimentation, and why sometimes the best way to get started is simply to give yourself permission to try. And, in true Testing Peers tradition, we begin with a rather important question about our last meals before the robot overlords take over. We'd love to hear from you! How do you approach getting buy-in for your ideas? Have you ever had an idea that initially went nowhere, only to succeed later? Or perhaps you've learnt the hard way what happens when people aren't brought along with a decision? #PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Price of £30. And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers) LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers) If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers Support the show

AI is changing how software is built. More can be generated, changed and shipped faster than before. So where does that leave testing and quality engineering, and what do we bring with us as the way we build software continues to change? In this episode, Chris, Russell and Tara are joined by Richard Hinton to explore what the AI era might mean for people working in testing and quality. Rather than trying to protect the role we have today, the conversation looks at how our skills can evolve alongside the technology and where a testing mindset becomes particularly valuable when the pace of change increases. There’s plenty that is new, from non-deterministic systems and AI-generated code to agents reviewing the work of other agents. There’s also plenty that feels remarkably familiar. We still need to understand risk. We still need useful feedback. We still need to challenge assumptions, understand what changed, ask whether everyone actually understood the same thing, and make decisions about when something is good enough. The conversation explores: Why speed and scale make critical thinking and fast feedback increasingly important.What happens when generating software becomes easier than understanding everything we have generated.The temptation to outsource our thinking alongside the more mundane parts of our work.Why small changes, experimentation and good engineering practices still matter when AI is doing some of the building.Accountability when humans and AI are increasingly involved in the same decisions and outputs.Bias, hallucinations and what happens when AI is trained on imperfect human behaviours, practices and data.Keeping our own skills sharp enough to question, direct and understand the tools we're using.How testing and quality roles might evolve towards risk, systems thinking and helping teams make sense of increasing amounts of information.The importance of connecting intent with outcomes, rather than assuming that faster creation automatically gives us better software.There’s no call here to stand on the sidelines waiting to say “we told you so”. AI gives us new capabilities, and we are going to experiment, get things wrong, learn and adapt. Testing has plenty to contribute to that process. Along the way, we also encounter AI reviewing AI, spaghetti monster systems, sunk costs, 99 bugs on the wall, overly agreeable LLMs and the possible need for critical-thinking rehab centres. The tools are changing. How we apply what we know will need to change with them. #PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Price of £30. And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers) LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers) If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers Support the show

What brings you joy in testing? In this episode, Chris, Russell and Tara are joined by Linda van der Vooren to talk about the parts of testing that still make the job worthwhile, even when work itself isn't always particularly joyful. They explore the satisfaction of making a genuine difference, solving difficult problems, helping others learn and watching ideas take hold beyond the person who introduced them. The conversation also turns to the testing community, finding people to learn from and challenge you, and the wonderfully unexpected knowledge you can accumulate simply by testing different things. There’s also room for deliberately doing things the awkward way, accessibility, root cause analysis, light bulb moments, learning through play, the potential for AI and automation to remove some of the joy of figuring things out, and why sometimes stepping away from work entirely is exactly what is needed. Along the way: testing bingo, rubber ducks, friction maxing, saxophones, pub quizzes, the great outdoors, naps and a glass wall erected to protect developers from an overly enthusiastic tester. What keeps you loving testing? #PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Price of £30. And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers) LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers) If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers Support the show

What are you known for? Is it what you want to be known for? And how much control do you have over either? In this episode of the Testing Peers, Chris Armstrong, Russell Craxford, Dan Ashby and Tara Walton explore intellectual territory: the ideas, problems and patterns of thinking we repeatedly return to. Against a backdrop of AI, changing roles and questions about future relevance, the Peers discuss whether intellectual territory is something we choose, discover or have placed upon us by others. They explore identity and perception, the opportunities and limitations of becoming known for something, and whether being a generalist makes territory harder to define. They also consider how territory can evolve as careers, interests and contexts change. And it doesn't require global recognition. Your intellectual territory might simply be what colleagues come to you for, what your team associates with you, or the perspective you consistently bring to a conversation. Exploring Your Intellectual Territory Chris introduces seven questions for exploring your own intellectual territory. The fuller prompts are below. The aim is to uncover something durable: not trendy topics or surface positioning, but the patterns of thinking that are consistently yours. 1. Across your past work, talks, writing and decisions: What recurring tensions do you return to?What problems do you seem unable to ignore?What assumptions do you frequently challenge?2. Where do you consistently add value? Do you clarify?Reframe?Simplify?Expose risk?Connect systems?Interrogate signals?Something else?3. What irritates you professionally? Vanity metrics?Superficial optimisation?Incentive distortion?Performative confidence?Something deeper?Irritation often points to intellectual territory. 4. What do you believe that is both: True across contexts, andUncomfortable enough that not everyone agrees?5. What is the mechanism behind your thinking? Do you operate through empiricism?Through systems thinking?Through cultural observation?Through risk framing?Through interrogation of assumptions?6. If you stripped away job titles and trends, what lens remains? 7. What capability would organisations strengthen if they deeply adopted your way of thinking? As you explore them: Challenge where you generalise. Push yourself to be specific. Avoid buzzwords. Avoid praise. Articulate patterns, not slogans. The questions aren't intended to produce an immediate answer. There may be a difference between the territory you believe you occupy and the one others place you in. You cannot completely control what sticks, but you can reflect on it, reinforce it or choose to move towards something different. References and Mentions The episode references Simon Sinek and Start With Why, Brené Brown's work on vulnerability and leadership, April Dunford and positioning, DORA metrics, Lisa Crispin & Janet Gregory and agile testing, and Dan Ashby's continuous testing/DevOps model. #PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Price of £30. The Call for Papers is open until July 31st, 2026: https://testingpeerscon.com/collaboration/ And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers) LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers) If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers Support the show

What does testing look like in 2026? In this episode, Tara Walton, Chris Armstrong, Russell Craxford and Dan Billing reflect on the current state of testing, quality engineering and software delivery in a rapidly changing industry. From the continued rise of AI and changing organisational priorities to evolving job titles, shifting responsibilities and the importance of context, the conversation explores both the opportunities and challenges facing quality professionals today. Despite ongoing disruption, many of the themes feel familiar. Communication, critical thinking, collaboration, adaptability and understanding customer value remain at the heart of effective testing. The panel discusses how quality professionals can continue to influence decisions, contribute earlier in the development process and help organisations navigate an increasingly complex technology landscape. Topics discussed The impact of AI on software development and testingWhy quality engineering remains about more than automationCommunication, influence and stakeholder engagementChanging roles and career paths within testingLegacy systems, modernisation and organisational changeThe importance of context, adaptability and human judgementWhat the future may hold for testing and quality engineering#PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Early Bird Price of £15 until later in the year. The Call for Papers is open until July 31st, 2026: https://testingpeerscon.com/collaboration/ And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers) LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers) If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers Support the show

In this episode, Russell, Tara, Ben Dowen, and Al Goodall explore end-to-end testing.   Starting with some light-hearted banter on coffee, triggered by Ben.  From what start to what end?  A recurring theme is being clear with what we mean when we say end-to-end The group reflect on: Using a term alongside terms like user journey and which userBeing clear about what 'flow' is being testedNot to test everythingIs it a sign of low testability and a smell of somethingIntegrations Often, these tests cross architecture and boundaries, and check some form of integration  Use the smallest unit of test to validate your goalEnd-to-End tests are expensive - time, effort, fragility, environmentsHelp reduce risk as ownership crosses teams in modern systemsThey find important failures#PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Early Bird Price of £15 until later in the year. Support the show

In this episode, Chris, Russell, David and Vernon try something a little different. Instead of ranting about the state of the industry, the conversation focuses on optimism, momentum, and the things they are genuinely excited about in 2026. Reasons to be cheerful The team reflect on what is giving them energy right now, from community and conference season to new projects, new teammates, and rediscovering enthusiasm after a difficult year. Growth, curiosity, and intentionality The conversation explores decisive humility, cautious optimism, and the importance of being intentional in how we work, learn, and grow. There is also discussion around revisiting testing fundamentals, pushing beyond comfort zones, and embracing opportunities to learn in unfamiliar spaces. Community and connection The group talk about the importance of conferences, shared experiences, and meeting people through the testing community. They also reflect on the continued growth of the Testing Peers podcast, rotating co-hosts, and the excitement around PeersCon. Looking ahead The episode closes with personal goals, side projects, travel plans, theme parks, cars, and the simple joy of having things to look forward to. This episode explores Optimism in testing and techCommunity, conferences, and connectionNew teammates and fresh energyDecisive humility and cautious optimismIntentionality and testing fundamentalsPersonal goals, projects, and things to look forward to#PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Early Bird Price of £15 until November 30th 2027. And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers) LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers) We’re also now on GoodPods, check it out via the mobile app stores If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers Support the show

In this episode, hosts Chris Armstrong and Russell Craxford are joined by #PeersCon27 Programme Chairs, Veerle Verhagen and Callum Akehurst-Ryan, to launch the Call for Collaboration. The conversation introduces the 2027 theme, explores what “quality on the boundaries” means in practice, and sets clear expectations for submissions. It also reinforces what makes #PeersCon different: real experiences over theory, diverse voices, and a community-first approach to shaping the programme. Theme Quality on the Boundaries: Where does quality begin and end, are there lines in testing that we won’t cross? What does this mean in practice The theme isn’t meant to be interpreted one way. For some, it’s about the boundaries of the work itself. The systems, the domains, the tooling, the edges where things get unclear or uncomfortable. For others, it’s about people. The boundaries between roles, between experience levels, between perspectives. Who owns quality, and where that ownership starts to blur. It might be about pushing forward. Exploring new spaces, new ideas, new ways of working in a landscape that is changing quickly. Or it might be about limits. The moments where things don’t work, where something shouldn’t be done, or where you’ve had to draw a line. There isn’t a single “right” interpretation. That’s the point. What matters is the experience behind it, and what others can learn from it. What to do next If you’re listening to this and thinking “I’ve got something there”… you probably do. This isn’t about having the perfect abstract or the most polished idea. It’s about the things you’ve actually lived through. The messy bits, the decisions you made, the times it worked, and the times it didn’t. Maybe you’ve pushed into a new space. Maybe you’ve been working at the edges of your role. Maybe you’ve hit a boundary and had to stop. Maybe you’ve crossed one and learned something the hard way. That’s what we want. And it doesn’t need to fit neatly into a box. Talks, workshops, or something a bit different, if you’ve got an idea that doesn’t quite fit, submit it anyway. If you’re not a “tester”, that’s fine too. Quality doesn’t belong to one role, and neither does this conference. If you’ve never spoken before, that’s not a blocker. Support is there to help shape your idea and your abstract. And if you’re thinking “this might be a bit niche”, that’s okay. Not every talk needs to be for everyone. So submit. Share your experience. Bring your perspective. The programme itself is being shaped by a deliberately diverse committee, alongside Veerle and Callum, including Jacob Urantowka, Lisa Crispin, Parveen Khan and Jitesh Gosai. And if you’re planning to attend, bring someone with you. A colleague, a friend, someone outside your usual circle. Why #PeersCon exists (and why it matters) Testing Peers exists because folks were working in isolation, and knew we weren't the only ones. It grew from a small group of peers looking for connection into something much bigger, but the intent hasn’t changed. It’s still about creating a space where people can share honestly, challenge each other, and learn from real experiences. It’s also intentionally accessible. Low cost, community-driven, and designed so people can attend without needing large budgets or corporate backing. And in a world that is becoming more automated, more distributed, and in some ways more isolating, spaces like this matter more. Not just for the talks, but for the conversations. The challenges. The different perspectives you don’t get day to day. That only works if people show up. If you want spaces like this to exist, support them. Submit. Attend. Bring others with you. Be part of it. Part of that support is partnership. #PeersCon is run by the community, for the community, but it does Support the show

In this episode, Russell, Chris, Tara, and David explore what a testing consultancy could look like if you stripped it back and built it around values, experience, and honest reflection. Starting with some light-hearted conference banter, the conversation quickly turns to consultancy models, what works, what does not, and what they would do differently. Outcomes over outputs A recurring theme throughout the discussion is the importance of focusing on outcomes rather than outputs. The group reflect on: Delivering meaningful change, not just activityAvoiding long-term dependency on consultantsMeasuring success by what happens after you leaveEnablement and sustainability Rather than doing the work for clients, the conversation leans towards: Setting up repeatable processesEnabling teams to continue without supportLeaving organisations self-sufficientThe idea of making yourself redundant comes up as a sign of success. Working with context The discussion explores how consultants engage with existing client environments: When to adapt to existing processesWhen to challenge and improve themThe importance of pragmatic, context-informed decisionsThere is no single answer, but a strong emphasis on informed choice and transparency. Thought leadership vs “bums on seats” The group question traditional consultancy models, particularly: Staff augmentationLong-running placementsValue tied to time rather than impactInstead, they explore a model centred around: Short-term, high-impact engagementsStrategic and cultural changeSupporting teams rather than filling rolesFollow-ups, iteration, and lasting change A key challenge raised is what happens after consultants leave. The group discuss: Returning at later checkpointsSupporting incremental changePreventing regression to old habitsThe idea is less one-off transformation, more ongoing iteration. Consultancy as connection An alternative model emerges during the conversation: Acting as a connector of people and expertiseMatching specialists to specific problemsLeveraging community rather than a fixed benchBlurring the line between consultancy, partnership, and network. Who would this be for? The group gravitate towards: Startups and scale-upsOrganisations open to changeTeams looking for guidance, not just deliveryWith less interest in: Large-scale augmentationTraditional long-term consultancy modelsThis episode explores What good consultancy looks like in practiceOutcomes vs outputs in client engagementsEnablement and making change stickNavigating client context and constraintsThought leadership vs staff augmentationAlternative consultancy models and community-led approachesReferenced in this episode Fiona Charles – 10 Commandments for Ethical Testers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQHt4Pao2Vs #PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Early Bird Price of £15 until November 30th 2027. Support the show

This episode of Testing Peers is published in recognition of International Women’s Day (8 March). International Women’s Day is a global moment to recognise the social, economic, cultural, and political achievements of women, while also highlighting the continued work needed to achieve gender equality. It is also a call to action to accelerate progress and support women’s advancement around the world. You can learn more about the campaign and its initiatives at https://www.internationalwomensday.com/ Episode Overview To mark International Women’s Day, this episode brings together Linda van de Vooren, Rachel Kibler, Tara Walton, and Christine Pinto for a conversation about their experiences working in software testing and technology. The discussion ranges from workplace dynamics and technical credibility to confidence, identity, and the importance of supportive communities in tech. Drawing on experiences across different countries, organisations, and career stages, the panel reflect on the challenges and opportunities of working in the industry today. International Women's Day Episode Highlights Theme songs for the moment The episode begins with a bit of Testing Peers banter as the hosts share the song that best represents their current stage of life. From Eye of the Tiger to Crowded Table and even a song from Frozen 2, the choices reflect everything from startup survival mode to building strong personal support networks. Being a woman in tech The panel discuss how experiences can vary depending on company culture, geography, and team dynamics. Several hosts reflect on the need to prove technical credibility, particularly in environments where testing already sits in tension with development. Finding allies Support within teams can make a real difference. The group share how allies often emerge through one-to-one conversations and how a single supportive voice in a meeting can change how concerns about quality or risk are received. Competition and the “crab bucket” effect The conversation touches on the crab bucket effect: situations where people unintentionally hold each other back in competitive or unhealthy environments. The group reflect on how workplace pressure and culture can contribute to this dynamic. Glue work and invisible labour The panel discuss glue work, the essential tasks that keep teams functioning but often go unnoticed. From meeting notes to coordination, these responsibilities can disproportionately fall to certain people unless teams actively share them. Identity and personal expression From purple hair and tiaras to red suits and owl dungarees, the hosts reflect on how personal expression can influence confidence and help people show up authentically at work. Safety and confidence The discussion acknowledges that confidence and self-expression depend on feeling safe at work. Moments of inappropriate behaviour or boundary crossing can quickly undermine that safety and require time and support to rebuild. Continuing the conversation at Agile Testing Days Towards the end of the discussion, Rachel Kibler highlights an opportunity to continue conversations like these at Agile Testing Days. [Placeholder: add Rachel’s exact forum/session name and wording here once confirmed.] The value of community The episode closes by reflecting on the strength of the testing community and spaces like Testing Peers, where people can share experiences, offer support, and remind each other they are not alone. This episode explores Women’s experiences in software testing and technologyBuilding allies and support within teamsNavigating bias and workplace expectationsThe “crab bucket effect” in compeSupport the show

Welcome to another episode of the Testing Peers podcast. In this episode, Veerle, Chris, Russell and Tara explore how hobbies influence the way we learn, collaborate and grow within testing and quality engineering. Before getting into the main topic, the Peers open with some classic banter, covering unusual fruit sizes, strange dreams and the small details that spark curiosity. The idea for this episode comes from talks and experiences shared within the community, where hobbies such as gaming, storytelling, crafting and sport have inspired lessons that translate into professional practice. From Vikings and Dungeons & Dragons to pro wrestling, knitting, baking and gym routines, the group reflects on how skills learned outside of work can shape communication, experimentation and continuous improvement. Bring your hobbies to work In this episode, the Peers discuss How hobbies help develop storytelling and teamwork skillsSeeing testing opportunities in everyday lifeDifferent personal paths into testing and quality engineeringLearning through experimentation, failure and iterationThe role of data, metrics and context in decision makingGrowth mindsets inspired by fitness, crafting and gamingBringing personality and individuality into technical spacesKey reflections This episode highlights how hobbies create spaces to experiment, adapt and learn without pressure. Whether journaling gym progress, inventing house rules in games or developing creative skills, these experiences mirror the iterative nature of testing itself. The Peers also explore how progress is not always visible in the moment. As skills evolve, expectations rise, which can make growth harder to recognise even when it is happening. Bring your hobbies to work #PeersCon26 Tickets for the event are live for just £30. And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 2 years, get in touch if interested Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers) LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers) We’re also now on GoodPods, check it out via the mobile app stores If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers Support the show

Hello and welcome to another episode of the Testing Peers podcast. This time, join Chris Armstrong, Rachel Kibler, Tara Walton, and Russell Craxford discussing what it means to create change in teams that are worn down, frustrated, or stuck in longstanding patterns.  In this episode, the Peers talk frame the discussion around practical reflections on joining difficult team contexts, building agency, identifying friction, and shaping improvements that matter without creating burnout. The group focuses on the difference between technical problems and people or adaptive challenges, the value of curiosity and influence, and the power of small, intentional actions that reduce unnecessary friction and build momentum toward better ways of working. Key themes and ideas Teams with history and fatigue Teams carry context, history, and stories long before new people arrive. What looks like dysfunction to a newcomer may be normalised pain to those who have lived with it. Past failed efforts at change often create deep scepticism. The “WTF list” Rachel introduces the idea of keeping a personal “WTF list” when joining a new team. This is a record of things that confuse, frustrate, or cause unnecessary pain. It is a tool for reflection, learning what to ask about, and identifying areas for low effort improvements while separating technical fixes from people or adaptive challenges. Some items are best kept for private reflection or manager conversations rather than shared openly. Technical problems versus people problems Technical problems usually have known solutions and can be addressed with the right expertise. People problems require influence, trust, and time. Effective change begins by asking why things are done the way they are before assuming what should be done. The risk of bonding over complaints Shared frustration can bond people quickly, "trauma bonding", but venting without action often leads to stagnation. Reflection and curiosity help teams ask what could realistically be done differently next time. Context before action Change attempts fail when history, constraints, or social dynamics are ignored. Newcomers often see pain points that existing teams have normalised. Without understanding the background, even good ideas can trigger resistance. Agency, choice, and acceptance Sometimes, change is not possible in the short term. Actively choosing to accept a situation can be more empowering than feeling trapped by it. Doing nothing can be valid when it is a conscious decision rather than passive resignation. Small wins and incremental change Not every improvement has to be dramatic. Small changes that remove friction can build trust and momentum over time. Cultural shifts often start with fixing minor but irritating problems rather than attempting wholesale transformation. Positivity and recognising progress Testing roles are often framed negatively, both by others and by the people doing the work. Creating space to acknowledge progress and success helps rebalance that narrative and improves team morale. Leadership and advocacy Leadership involves passing feedback upwards and advocating for change even when the leader cannot fix the problem directly. Choosing where to invest influence is an important leadership skill. Takeaways You cannot change everything from every position.Context and history matter more than frameworks.Influence is more effective than instruction in people-related challenges.Small, deliberate improvements build momentum for bigger shifts.Conscious acceptance is still a form of agency.Recommended Reading Your Leadership Edge by Ed O’Malley and Amanda Cebula A practical guide to the competencies and mindset required when everyone leads and challenges are not straightforward. The book emphasises Support the show

Hello friends, and welcome to another episode of the Testing Peers podcast. In this episode, Chris, Dan, David, and Russell come together for a wide-ranging conversation about flow, what it really means, and why it matters far beyond speed or delivery metrics. The discussion starts with some light New Year banter before quickly moving into systems thinking, value, and the often unseen friction that slows organisations down. The group explore flow as something that exists across people, processes, and systems, not just CI/CD pipelines. Using plumbing analogies, real-world examples, and a healthy dose of scepticism about simplistic metrics, they unpack why optimising individual components rarely improves outcomes if the wider system is ignored. A recurring theme is the idea that quality is about the removal of unnecessary friction, and that debt shows up in many forms, not just code. Documentation, onboarding, learning mechanisms, and organisational processes all contribute to how effectively value moves through a system. The conversation also touches on how difficult flow is to measure meaningfully. While metrics like DORA can tell part of the story, they often focus on speed rather than outcomes, impact, or sustainability. The hosts discuss the importance of qualitative signals, trending over time, and understanding what good actually looks like in a given context. A significant part of the episode focuses on the human side of flow, including onboarding, learning, feedback loops, and psychological safety. The group reflect on how better onboarding and clearer purpose can help people contribute sooner, feel more connected to their work, and understand the impact of what they do. From a testing perspective, the discussion highlights how testers already have many of the skills needed to assess flow at an organisational level. Curiosity, critical thinking, risk awareness, and communication all play a role in identifying friction, asking difficult questions, and helping teams improve. At the same time, the hosts are careful not to position testers as uniquely gifted, recognising that good systems thinking comes from diverse roles working together. The episode closes with reflections on trust, credibility, and the role of testers as trusted advisors. Being listened to is not about job titles or tools, but about doing the work, understanding the system, and backing up insights with evidence and experience. Links and references DORA metrics: https://dora.dev/guides/dora-metrics/The Phoenix Project: https://itrevolution.com/product/the-phoenix-project/Theory of Constraints: https://www.leanproduction.com/theory-of-constraints/Stu Crocker on quality as the removal of unnecessary frictionPost Office Horizon IT Scandal: https://clarotesting.wordpress.com/the-post-office-horizon-it-scandal/#PeersCon26 Tickets for the event are live for just £30. And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 2 years, get in touch if interested Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers) LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers) Support the show

Happy New Year, Peers!! Welcome to the latest episode of the Testing Peers podcast, this time panel explores how testers and quality professionals can make the most of their training budgets, whether that budget is zero, modest, or stretches into several thousand pounds. Hosts this week: Russell Craxford, David Maynard, Chris Armstrong, and Tara Walton. The discussion is grounded in real experience and looks at how learning choices change depending on constraints, priorities, and organisational context. Starting from Zero: Learning Without a Budget The episode begins by challenging the assumption that learning requires money. The hosts highlight the breadth and quality of free resources available, including: Blogs, podcasts, and community-driven contentFree learning platforms such as Test Automation University, freeCodeCamp, and edXVendor-provided learning resources from tooling and platform providersA key recommendation is the free “Learning How to Learn” course by Barbara Oakley and Terrence Sejnowski, which helps people understand how they learn best before deciding where to invest time or money. Spending Around £100: Small Budgets, Real Value With a budget of around £100, the focus shifts to intentional, value-led choices: Books as a focused, low-distraction way to learn:Subscriptions to learning platforms rather than single coursesPrioritising practical outcomes over certificatesUsing community recommendations to avoid low-quality contentTestSphere and RiskStorming cardsObviously, the Testing Peers Conference, March 12th 2026Books such as Explore It, The Phoenix Project, The Culture Code and other systems thinking titles are highlighted as high-value, low-cost investments. Around £500: Community, Conferences, and Exposure At the £500 level, learning opportunities expand: Attending local conferences, meetups, or community events Leeds Test Atelier (Free to attend)SIGiSTShipItConCovering travel, accommodation, and tickets for nearby eventsInvesting in leadership, communication, and presentation skillsSubscriptions such as Ministry of Testing Pro (including a ticket to their #MoTaCon event) and similar learning communitiesLeanPubThe hosts discuss the value of human connection, being exposed to new perspectives, and coming away from events with renewed ideas and motivation. Certifications and Career Signals The conversation takes a balanced view on certifications, including ISTQB: Not a definition of quality or capabilityPotentially useful for people entering the industryHelpful as a signal when experience is limitedMore valuable as a foundation than an end goalSupport the show

Support the show