Advertise on podcast: The Vernon Richard Show

The chaps break with routine and bring a guest on the pod! Be sure to register for SmartBear’s upcoming webinar with Andy Weir, author of The Martian, where he’ll be talking about ‘From AI Chaos to Agentic QA’  Register here - https://smartbear.com/lp/from-ai-chaos-to-connected-software-quality/?utm_source=r-bradshaw&utm_medium=content-creator&utm_campaign=CP-26-q4-npi&utm_content Chris Armstrong runs developer relations at SmartBear, which means part of his job is telling a tool vendor what testers really think, and part of it is telling testers what that vendor is really up to. Sometimes it means saying "no chance" to both. That puts him in an interesting seat for the question hanging over this whole conversation. More and more testing is being handed to agents that go off and do the work while nobody is watching. So what happens to the people who used to do it, how do you know the agent did what it says it did, and who carries the can when it didn't? Vern opens by admitting he's no longer sure what his job even is. Rich has been putting SmartBear's own testing agent through its paces on camera, and it hasn't always behaved. And Chris has a confession about a school homework diary that might change how you read every green dashboard you see from now on. This episode is sponsored by SmartBear. 00:00 - Intro01:22 - "What even is this job anymore?" Why Vern feels like he's failing, and is smiling anyway03:45 - What changed in how testers talked about AI at HUSTEF this year05:27 - A DevRel (manager no less!) on a testing podcast?!06:38 - If AI isn’t a tool, what is it?09:42 - DevRel in two words, and neither of them is "sales"12:52 - What happens if we clamp AI onto everything we've hated for 20 years14:29 - The company says A, the community is doing B. Whose side is DevRel on?17:35 - Useless consulting and what Chris calls decisive humility24:47 - Why Chris asked people why they hate test management tools, rather than run a survey28:19 - Application integrity is on Chris's T-shirt. What does it mean off it?29:57 - "Who tested this?" and the game credits Chris didn't want his name on31:47 - The CTO who vibe coded a customer onboarding platform, and what happened at review33:05 - Can you buy application integrity off the shelf?37:48 - Why Vern thinks test teams are about to start behaving like product teams40:59 - DIY, DWY, DFY? Vern explains42:11 - Everyone wants it done for them, right up until…44:58 - Testers asked for agency for years. Now we have to hand some of it over46:20 - BearQ hasn't always done what Rich wanted, and he isn't sure that's BearQ's fault50:00 - The dashboard Chris calls useless51:35 - The weak control check Chris beat at school, every single week52:36 - "Richard said he tested it" used to be proof. What counts when an agent says it?55:49 - What Andy Weir has to do with showing your work59:07 - The Richards Question Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 02:23 - HUSTEFTheir website (which currently features a familiar face on it 😄)03:07 - Chris ArmstrongChris's blogChris's podcast Testing Peers (of PeersCon fame!)Chris's YouTubeChris's LinkedInWe’ll add Chris's HUSTEF talk here once it’s available - VR06:18 - SmartBear toolsThe LoadNinja websiteThe SoapUI website06:41 - The LinkedIn thread on tools versus automation08:12 - ReadyAPIThe ReadyAPI website08:35 - BearQThe BearQ website10:56 - The book Developer Relations by Caroline Lewko and James Parton11:34 - The SmartBear Community25:02 - Chris's post asking why people hate test management tools [URL]26:03 - SmartBear webinar on the OpenAPI Specification updates [URL]26:03 - OpenAPI Specification [URL]28:30 - SmartBear on application integrity [URL]29:23 - Nicole van der HoevenNicole’s YouTube channelNicole’s podcast (that she co-hosts with the incredible Marie Cruz)Nicole’s LinkedInWe’ll add Nicole's HUSTEF talk here once it’s available - VR30:50 - Definition of ReadyYou can find a reasonable definition here34:12 - A one-page test plan article inspired by Claire Reckless’s work41:05 - An explanation of Do it yourself, done with you, done for you (albeit in the context of content creation)42:24 - Levels of driving automation (SAE J3016)54:27 - BearQ, the first assignable QA agent in Atlassian54:47 - We will NOT add Rich's HUSTEF keynote talk here once it’s available - VR56:02 - SmartBear event with Andy Weir, 22 October56:02 - Andy Weir the author of The Martian and Project Hail Mary56:22 - The StarTalk episode where Neil deGrasse Tyson talks to Andy Weir57:24 - Rich's BearQ video series58:14 - Vern's 30-day writing challenge58:22 - Øredev Conference, Malmö58:31 - The Automation in Testing (AiT) siteVernon's Yeah But Does It Work? newsletter Call to actionChris says a tool vendor can't do much with "I don't like it", and neither can we. So tell us why. If you agree, let us know. If you disagree, let us know. If you violently agree or violently disagree, definitely let us know. Guest episodes are an experiment for us, so we especially want to hear whether you'd like more of them, and who you'd like us to invite next. Questions, comments and concerns are all welcome. And don’t forget: Like, subscribe, and share 😊.

A listener asks which domino to push first, and the chaps immediately disagree about where to start. Shady has been a QA engineer for about five years and has recently joined a new organisation. Like most of us walking into somewhere new, he can see more things worth improving than he could ever get to at once, and no obvious order to do them in. So which one goes first? Vernon goes straight for wherever the pain is greatest. Richard says do it the other way round entirely, and has a spreadsheet ready to prove it. Between the two of them sits the part nobody warns you about when you take the job: the thing you were hired to fix is very often not the problem, your credibility to say so out loud has a half-life, and the clock started the moment you walked in. Also, a man who finds water leaks for a living turns out to be running a testing process most of us could learn something from. Chapters 00:00 - Intro01:16 - Welcome: Energy levels and an idea for a future episode03:07 - A question from the audience03:51 - Shady’s question: Which QA domino do you push first?04:48 - One line answers FTW!06:04 - Rich maps the terrain08:24 - Vern does the not so obvious obvious thing10:12 - What’s the underlying problem?12:19 - How to choose between a quick win and a long-term play?13:55 - Instead of creating a master plan, do this instead.15:47 - Work like a… Drug dealer?!17:38 - Pickles19:44 - Because reasons21:05 - Rob Meaney thinks we have our priorities backwards24:01 - The colleague who argued against more test coverage, and won26:16 - Can you even prove the flaky automation is the problem?28:54 - GitHub's availability has never been worse. Rich has a theory why29:54 - Is Shady looking at a testing problem or a quality problem?31:12 - What happens when you tell them their problem isn't the problem32:50 - Education over illusion, and why "you're wrong" never lands36:18 - Does it matter that you can't name the technique you just used?37:24 - The page object question Rich asks, and the answer that ends the interview41:12 - Jonesy, a gambling machine, and the certificate that taught him nothing46:05 - The leak is never where the damage is47:14 - The leak hunter who checks the water company's homework first49:39 - Cars, doctors and solicitors are all playing 20 questions with you52:19 - The videos where he gets it wrong, and why testers never post those53:44 - Wrapping up, and a plea for more questions Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 02:05 - Leigh RathboneLeigh's LinkedIn03:07 - Shady ZahranShady’s LinkedIn03:31 - Olly FairhallOlly's LinkedInOlly's Bluesky03:31 - Emily O’ConnorEmily's LinkedIn06:15 - The 10 P’s of TestabilityArticle on testability featuring the 10 PsThe book Team Guide to Software Testability by Ash Winter & Rob Meaney17:38 - The Prescott Pickle Principle from Jerry’s book The Secret’s of Consulting19:44 - “Things are the way they are because they got that way. Another one from The Secret’s of Consulting book!20:42 - The fairy tale The Emperor’s New Clothes by Hans Christian Andersen22:20 - Rob’s great article about how to prioritise our work called Most Product Development Teams Have Their Priorities Upside Down28:14 - Dan AshbyDan’s LinkedIn34:00 - Richard's automation and testing principles, including "education over illusion"37:24 - The page object model47:14 - This is Josh Pollard, the drain and leak specialist Richard follows on Instagram49:39 - Mat Armstrong, the car YouTuber from LeicesterVernon's newsletter Yeah But Does It Work?That's the answer we gave Shady, and we're fully prepared to be told we got it wrong. If you agree, let us know. If you disagree, let us know. If you violently agree or violently disagree, definitely let us know. Where would you start on day one in a new team, and what did it cost you when you started in the wrong place? Questions, comments and concerns are all welcome, and if you send us a question we will answer it on the show, same as we did for Shady. Like, subscribe, and share.

Rich reckons testers and QEs are the best positioned engineers of the next few years. Vern's question is whether a market that knows exactly what it wants also knows what it needs. Tell us which of us you think is closer, and why. If you violently agree or violently disagree, definitely tell us. Questions, comments, concerns, corrections, all of it is welcome, and the more of you who share what is actually happening where you work, the better a picture the rest of us get. Drop a comment on the post, drop a comment on the video, or come and find us on LinkedIn. And if you got something out of this one, like it, subscribe, and send it to the person you were arguing with about this last week. Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 03:34 and 11:33 - Rich's LinkedIn post, the one this whole episode is built onRich's LinkedInRich's website26:09 - Vern's newsletter, Yeah, But Does It Work?30:02 and 37:52 - Steven DevonportSteve's comment on the post, and his follow up question about whether visibility and transparency are the currencies we should be spending35:17 - Exploratory data analysis40:28 - Huib Schoots40:46 - Keith KlainKeith's blog, Quality Remarks43:21 - Oracles and Evals46:59 - If you’re wondering the term “The Fat Controller” comes from, here’s the Wikipedia entry for Sir Topham Hatt49:51 - Rashik PrasadRashik's comment about wearing more hats50:58 - ELT stands for Executive Leadership Team aka The C-Suite. SLT is the Senior Leadership Team, the layer below55:26 - Jason SmithJason's comment about responsibility being distributed while accountability is not58:10 - The episode where we talked about quality coaches and specialists being distributed across teams1:00:48 - James Thomas, friend of the podJames's blog1:04:23 - Episode 34, 6 AI Tool Ideas That Will Transform How You Test, where tool idea #1 is the LLM that reads your tickets for you1:09:27 - The jagged frontierHelen Toner’s article Taking Jaggedness Seriously where I first heard the termThe paper where Ethan Mollick coined the termVernon Richards and Richard Bradshaw on the showThe Vernon Richard Show on LinkedIn and YouTube00:00 - Intro01:31 - ⚽️ Fresh World Cup wounds and new specs03:34 - Careful what you shout from the rooftops06:25 - The market is being very clear about what it wants08:11 - Wanting vs needing10:50 - Nobody enjoys writing test cases. Turns out that was practice11:33 - The post, read out in full13:38 - Rich joined that project as the AI QA and then…15:50 - Building an agent felt suspiciously familiar17:17 - "It's not my work": testing what the agent wrote18:23 - Some engineers have not adapted, and it is not a skills problem20:10 - The person on the project who found more bugs than Rich did22:20 - "I don't know what a dedicated QA would have done"24:09 - Two job numbers heading in opposite directions26:09 - More code, more surface area: the maths from Vern's newsletter28:06 - Why the model swore blind that Finnish was not on the list30:02 - Steven Devonport takes issue with the word evolving32:16 - Rich reckons most of the AI testing problem is old news35:17 - The AI crowd reinvented exploratory testing and gave it another name37:52 - Steve's tangent: which currency should we be spending?42:46 - When 70/30 drifts to 55/45, who makes the call?43:21 - We used to be handed our oracles45:28 - Vern's problem with calling it a black box46:59 - The Fat Controller heuristic (and his new name)48:56 - The prompt was still asking for values that no longer existed49:51 - Rashik Prasad: if everyone owns quality, who holds its shape?50:58 - What an AI first mandate actually does to a company52:45 - Everyone has hold of a different part of the elephant55:26 - Jason Smith: responsibility travels, accountability stays put56:29 - Four or five people changes more than you would think59:09 - Your pod is not the only pod1:01:12 - Responsible for the outcome, allowed to decide nothing1:02:46 - Ten factories became a hundred1:04:48 - The standards check nobody could build until now1:05:28 - Vern remembers what everyone did to the linters1:09:33 - Mostly right, most of the time, and the trap inside that1:10:46 - Why Rich is excited anyway1:12:05 - The market wants what it wants1:12:43 - Wrap up

Call to action - How are you proving you can actually use this stuff? Certs? Stories? A suspiciously long list of tools on your CV? We want to hear what the market is asking of you right now, especially if you're hiring or job hunting. And if your CV says "I use Copilot", ask yourself the question before Rich does: so what? Drop us a message on LinkedIn and let us know. AI is becoming an expectation rather than a differentiator. So if everyone is using it, how do you actually stand out? In this episode, Richard and Vernon discuss the changing job market, why simply saying "I use AI" no longer means much, and how to demonstrate real value in an industry that's changing faster than ever. From AI certifications and CVs to storytelling, trust, and communicating your impact, they explore what professionals should be focusing on next. **In this episode:** * Why AI is no longer enough to make you stand out* The return of certifications—and whether they matter* How to communicate your value beyond your CV* Why impact beats tool lists every time* Building with AI vs. building AI* The skills that will matter most in the years ahead If you enjoyed the discussion, don't forget to like, subscribe, and let us know your thoughts in the comments. How are you proving your value in the age of AI? Chapters00:00 - Intro01:19 - Welcome (Tees, Tiles, Travel, and Trouwen)05:15 - Where should you place your bets right now?08:29 - Wait, certifications are back?11:50 - Do you still have your GCSEs on your CV?13:34 - The three flavours of AI work15:43 - Vern's guide to surviving the trust recession20:04 - The AI etiquette flip nobody announced21:27 - How to blow an opportunity in one DM26:05 - Here comes the trough of disillusionment29:53 - Rich's two-word CV test32:31 - Manual, skilled, or knowledge work? (Vern's ATD talk preview)35:58 - Testing has been rehearsing this for decades40:15 - CV bullets that make Rich want to interview you44:01 - How good at AI are you, really?46:05 - The four levels Vern pinched from Dan North48:30 - "It's my mission": how Rich works with AI51:30 - The skill nobody's talking about52:45 - Next time: who's looking after all these agents?58:10 - Wrap up Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod 01:31 - OfferZen (who are still around - yay!) sponsored one of the Let's Test events in South Africa. The speakers got a tee for presenting!I would love it if we could figure out a way to run Let's Test South Africa again because it was an incredible event…03:05 - Congratulations Beren and Elaine! ❤️Other notable guests from the software world included:Cassandra H. Leung (website and LI)Ard Kramer (LI)Zeger Van Hese (LI)Viola Korte (LI)Geert van de Lisdonk (who Vernon rudely didn't mention but can also be found on LI 🤦🏾‍♂️)05:47 - John CutlerJohn talks about Bets, Boards, Missions and North Stars from 2021 but if you want to read something more recent…… you should check out John's newsletterJohn's LinkedIn08:52 - Anthropic's certifications (or learnings at least)08:20 - Google's AI certifications (or learnings at least)BE ADVISED: These may not be the same ones Rich mentioned - YMMV!12:12 - Chris ArmstrongChris's blogChris's podcast The Testing Peers (of PeersCon fame!)Chris's YouTubeChris's LinkedIn21:27 - Gergely Orosz aka The Pragmatic EngineerHere's the post about AI-written messages and it turns out Gergely had another example of this happen more recently 😬The Pragmatic Engineer newsletterAlso, if by some miracle you're reading this Gergely, I've learned how to pronounce your name properly now 🤦🏾‍♂️🙏🏾 VR26:05 - The Gartner hype cycle (peak of inflated expectations, trough of disillusionment)32:20 - Vernon's talk at Agile Testing Days 2026 If Testers Had a Dragon's Den Pitch, Would Anyone Invest?Hit him up for a discount code!44:01 - An X post about how companies are talking about AI proficiency at the org level46:05 - Dan North's talk on dynamic teams and skill levelsIt turns out (because Dan) he's done several talks on this topic!There's this (the first one I watched and the one Vernon had in mind)… and you can see the levels part here but honestly watch the whole thing because it's greatThere's also this which is a bit more recent and he explains it differently to the first talk55:11 - OpenAI's article on harness engineering

The chaps dig into another Keithism to see where it takes them. Keith Klain published a blog post that drew a line in the sand for testers. His conclusion is blunt: there's a specific type of testing work that too many in our industry believe is our raison d'etre, while the market is rapidly reassessing its value (and not in a good way!). Chapters 00:00 - Intro 01:12 - Welcome (may contain traces of Premier League banter) 03:00 - Who is Keith Klain and why should you listen to him? 06:30 - Checking vs testing: what's the actual difference? 12:00 - Keith's warning: AI is coming for the… 12:56 - The CEO has one job… 14:04 - …and they have two ways to do it 15:31 - If your value isn’t the amount of tests you’ve executed, what is it? 19:42 - Richard's updated AiT principle: shared understanding over assumed understanding 23:53 - Shift left is more than "test the requirement first" 27:18 - The ways your perceived value is constantly moving. 31:57 - Maaike's stance: what if you refuse to use AI entirely? 34:09 - Too big to fail? What AI investment really means for the industry 39:53 - The skill no one taught testers that now matters most 42:54 - "Become the insufferable AI person" and other survival tactics 45:22 - Keith's call to action 47:09 - Why no one at Test Coast said "risk" when asked why they test 51:01 - AI summaries as input to other AI: the risk nobody designed for 54:00 - How one bad step ruins everything 55:27 - Statistics, Hugging Face, and the skills testers need to learn next 57:43 - There’s more than one way to “be technical” 59:54 - A rallying cry from Rich to the testing community 01:04:00 - Forward-deployed engineers: just a QE by another name? Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 03:00 - Keith KlainKeith's blog Quality RemarksThe blog post that triggered this episode: "Checking isn't testing. Soon it won't be employment either."Keith's LinkedIn19:33 - ELT stands for Executive Leadership Team aka The C-Suite. The folks who have job titles like Chief Executive Office (CEO), Chief Technology Officer (CTO), etc.20:00 - You can find Richard's AiT Principles hereAnd you can listen to his new ideas about those principles in Episode 33 “Six Principles of Automation in Testing: Still Relevant in 2026?”We’ll add a link to the talk as soon as we can27:18 - Vernon's Credibility Playbook27:18 - Vernon’s upcoming Agile Testing Days talk “If Testers Had a Dragon’s Den Pitch, Would Anyone Invest?”DM Vern if you’re interested in going as he might be able to help… 😉32:00 - Maaike's LinkedIn post Vernon referred to during the episodeYou should subscribe to her blog too34:14 - John CutlerJohn’s newsletterJohn’s LinkedIn37:26 - Simon WardleyIf you're not following Simon Wardley, please follow Simon Wardley! His work on Wardley Maps and situational awareness in strategy is essential readingSimon's LinkedIn46:38 - Rapid Software Testing (RST) is the methodology created by James Bach and Michael Bolton.47:12 - The Test Coast Conference where Richard delivered a keynote49:44 - Vidya Ranganathan’s fanbloodytastic post about the different kinds of risks we should be consideringVidya's LinkedIn56:48 - Hugging FaceThe Hugging Face websiteThe Wikipedia page

"Testing Is Not a Specialism" - You keep using that word… Vernon got triggered. A bold LinkedIn post declared "PSA: testing is not a specialism. Thank you for your time." Mic drop, walk off stage, no explanation. And it wasn't just one person. So Vernon did what any self-respecting tester would do: he asked why. And didn't get an answer. In this episode, Vernon and Richard dig into why some developers seem to find the idea of testing as a specialism genuinely laughable, what happens when you confuse a skill with a role, and why, in a world where everyone's building agentic workflows, nobody seems to notice that they're writing skills.md files full of testing knowledge. They also explore how AI is already reshaping what's expected of every role on a software team, why "knowing what good looks like" has never mattered more, and what skill stacking means for testers who want to stay ahead of the curve. Chapters 00:00 - Intro 01:17 - Vern's welcome rant 01:42 - The topic: Is testing a specialism? 07:17 - Rich gets a chance to speak 😅 07:29 - Good Testers vs Bad Testers 11:15 - Aren't we all developers now anyway? 13:06 - There's testing and there's Testing 15:01 - Testers communicating their value 18:34 - If testing isn't a specialism, where does that leave agents and skills? 20:30 - The lads cook up a new way to reframe the situation 23:53 - Who should do testing? 32:27 - Vern believes these folks are saying one thing and doing another 35:02 - Rich wants to know what happens to the 0.5x Testers? 40:02 - Skill Stacking 45:36 - The thing most people haven't done but need to 50:04 - Are we all Domain Translators now? 54:23 - Wrap up Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 01:42 - Paul's interesting LinkedIn post that triggered Vernon03:34 - The question I asked on LinkedIn about why "people" get so triggered about testing as a role05:33 - Greg's interesting post about test management and levels of competence06:31 - Jade Rubick's post questioning whether QA should exist at all!10:46 - Angie Jones (the only thing Angie is terrible at is being terrible!)Angie's blogAngie's LinkedIn14:11 - The episode When Everything Sounds Like Testing… How Do You Explain What You Really Do?14:46 - Funnily enough, Vernon is giving this talk at Agile Testing Days 2026!It's called If Testers Had a Dragon's Den Pitch, Would Anyone Invest?DM Vernon if you would like a discount code for the conference!15:07 - The very cool GreaTest Quality Conference27:25 - Jason Bourne a fictional character from some of the best movies ever (especially the first two ^VR)28:29 - Anne-Marie CharrettThe excellent book in digital or physical versionsAnne-Marie's websiteBe sure to check out the blog which is no longer pay-walled 🥳Anne-Marie's LinkedIn28:29 - James BachThe Test Jumper description we refer toJames' blogJames' LinkedIn51:02 - Nate B. Jones (Shout out Martin for putting Vernon on to it 🙏🏾The post about developer roles mentioned in the episodeNate's newsletterNate's websiteNate's YouTubeNate's LinkedIn56:52 - Vernon did write Vernon Version 3 - Now with added AI! all about the skills he thinks he needs to develop going forwardsPlease like, subscribe, and share 😊 ^VR Got thoughts on whether testing is a specialism? We genuinely want to hear from you. Vernon still doesn't have an answer to his question. Run it past a friendly developer and let us know what they say. Drop us a message on LinkedIn and if Paul or Greg are listening, the invitation to come on the pod is very much open.

In this episode, Richard and Vernon explore the evolving concept of automation in quality, especially in the context of AI and Gen AI. They discuss how new technologies are blurring the lines between testing and quality, and what this means for the future of software development and testing practices. 00:00 - Intro00:52 - Welcome and weekly catch-up01:11 - Vern's deep dive into the AI rabbit hole02:39 - Rich’s quit(er) work week, new threads, and dentists04:15 - Richard buys a domain and we started the pod proper06:09 - Tool idea #1: Using an LLM to evaluate user stories and acceptance criteria automatically07:35 - Is analysing a story "testing" or "quality"? The ISTQB static analysis debate10:27 - Vernon's diabetes analogy: AI is forcing us to finally do what we always said we should12:19 - Better stories = better testing: how quality work amplifies everything downstream13:11 - Tool idea #2: "If we made this change, what areas of the system would be impacted?"14:23 - Distilling years of system knowledge into 5–10 questions an agent could ask18:37 - Tool idea #3: The PR Analyser — summarising code changes through a testing and quality lens21:45 - Vernon's "1 unit of effort, 5 units of testing" — the quality multiplier effect23:29 - Comparing story analysis to actual implementation: where did understanding diverge?24:43 - Tool idea #4: Dynamic test selection — cherry-picking the right tests to run first27:05 - Tool idea #5: An agent that analyses failed builds and attempts to fix them27:28 - Why Richard's first attempt always "fixed" the test instead of the code (and what was missing)29:21 - Dan's AI agents: one thinking partner, one employee monitoring production32:42 - The documentation goldmine: why AI-generated RCA notes might matter more than the fix33:39 - Tool idea #6: A holistic quality dashboard pulling insights across stories, code, tests, and process36:43 - John Cutler on context: it's not data you pass around — it's formed through interaction40:43 - More options than ever: whether it's testing, quality, or static analysis — you can do it differently now41:56 - The real skill: spotting the opportunity to make yourself more effective42:30 - Ge Hill's Lump of Code Fallacy and why task analysis matters43:34 - Why Richard got into automation: efficiency, not because he was told to45:03 - Vernon's big question: in a world where agents can do everything, what's your performance review about?46:52 - Context, craft, and product knowledge can't be delegated to tools yet48:29 - Call to action: What are you building? What tools couldn't you build before that you can now?49:29 - Upcoming: Test Automation Days and PeerCon Live in Nottingham Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 04:15 - Automation in QualityRichard bought the automationinquality.com domain! The concept explored throughout this episode.05:28 - Kalpesh Sodha aka KalpsShout out to Richard's colleague who played devil's advocate on the "is it testing or quality?" question07:31 - Static analysis29:44 - Dan "The Agile Guy" ElliottHis post about how he uses AI agents as a "thinking partner" and an "employee" with different missions and capabilitiesDan’s websiteDan's LinkedIn36:52 - John CutlerJohn Cutler's piece on how context isn't just data you move around — it's formed through interaction between peopleJohn's newsletterJohn's LinkedIn42:37 - Rob SabourinMy quick Perplexity search for Rob's public material on Task AnalysisRob's Linkedin42:45 - Michael “GeePaw” HillHis Lump of Code Fallacy. The idea that coding isn't just one activity — there are three flavours of work that occur when you codeMichael’s websiteMichaels Mastadon49:35 - Test Automation DaysRichard will be keynoting at Test Automation DaysMake sure you say hi if you’re there50:10 - PeersConVernon and Richard will be recording a live episode at PeersCon!If you're there, come say hi and grab a mic 🎙️

In this episode, Richard Bradshaw and Vernon discuss the relevance and application of the six principles of automation in testing in the context of AI advancements. They explore how these principles hold up in 2026, the challenges faced in automation, and the future of testing strategies. 00:00 - Intro 01:47 - Welcome (Richard is not at home 👀) 02:07 - Ramadan, cooking without tasting, and plastic teeth 🦷 04:01 - Today's topic: revisiting the AiT principles ahead of a keynote 04:58 - What is Automation in Testing (AiT)? 06:49 - Principle 1: Supporting Testing over Replicating Testing 07:01 - Vernon's take: testing is a performance, not a click sequence 08:22 - What the industry promised vs what automation actually does 08:49 - The serendipity you lose when a human isn't testing 09:59 - Agentic testing: observing more, but still not replicating humans 10:56 - The danger of anthropomorphising AI output 12:10 - LLMs always give an answer — and that's the problem 13:03 - Principle 2: Testability over Automatability 13:14 - Vernon's take: narrow vs broad — operate, control, observe 14:38 - Making apps automatable for the robots but not the humans 15:37 - The shiniest framework in a broken testing context 16:40 - If it's testable, it's probably automatable — but not vice versa 16:55 - Automation strategy vs testing strategy: when they compete, everyone loses 17:46 - The problem has always been testing, not automation 19:57 - Principle 3: Testing Expertise over Coding Expertise 20:18 - Vernon's take: testing expertise lets you leverage the tools 21:47 - The spoonfed tests problem: great at automating, lost without guidance 22:36 - The "code school" era: everyone told to learn to code 22:51 - Coding agents have changed the maths on this 26:01 - The new nuance: test design and framework knowledge over writing the code 28:44 - Evaluating code is a testing problem — and LLMs can help you do it 30:43 - Are agents as good as a junior developer? 31:42 - Outcome Engineering (O16G) and the race to write the AI principles 32:13 - Simon Wardley: we're in the wild west again 33:22 - Principle 4: Problems over Tools 33:29 - Vernon's take: the hammer and the nail 34:07 - Don't let your problems be shaped by the framework you have 34:36 - New automation opportunities beyond testing: PRs, logs, story review 35:30 - Principle 5: Risk over Coverage 36:12 - Vernon's take: 100% coverage ≠ 100% risk coverage 38:00 - The one test case, one automated test fallacy 39:04 - Where in the system is the risk? Do you even know your layers? 39:49 - Probabilistic vs non-deterministic: refining the language around AI 40:53 - Coverage as intentional vs coverage as a number someone picked once 43:15 - Principle 6: Observability over Understanding 43:24 - Vernon's take: just-in-time understanding vs reading everything upfront 44:12 - What the principle was actually about: making automation results observable 47:00 - Does this principle belong in testing, or has it grown into quality? 49:00 - So... what's missing? 50:00 - The four pillars: Strategy, Creation, Usage, and Education 57:05 - Automation in Quality: the bigger opportunity 01:01:00 - Wrap up + Vern's Lead Dev panel Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 04:00 - Automation in Testing (AiT)The principles live at automationintesting.comAiT was co-created by Richard Bradshaw and Mark Winteringham04:00 - Test Automation DaysThe conference where Richard is giving his keynote — testautomationdays.com24:48 - James ThomasThe "kid in a candy shop" himself — James's blog and LinkedIn31:42 - Outcome Engineering (016G)The article Richard shared before recording — worth tracking down if you're interested in where agentic development practices are heading32:13 - Simon WardleyIf you're not following Simon Wardley, please follow Simon Wardley! His work on Wardley Maps and situational awareness in strategy is essential readingSimon's LinkedIn43:30 - Abby BangserVern's go-to person for all things observability. Abby's LinkedIn46:04 - Noah SusmanAs it turns out, the quote Vern's referencing: advanced monitoring as "indistinguishable from testing" was not by Noah! It was Ed Keyes at GTAC 2007.Noah's blog and LinkedIn59:30 - Angie JonesVern's been reading Angie's work on testing AI-enabled applications here and here.Angie's website and LinkedIn01:01:30 - The Lead Dev panel Vernon will be part of"How to Measure the Business Impact of AI" — happening 25th February, free to sign up01:02:00 - Richard's Selenium Conf talk"Redefining Test Automation" — the talk that the Test Automation Days keynote is shaping up to be a spiritual successor to.

This was supposed to be about testing.Instead, it turned into a conversation about burnout, money, leadership, community, AI, and what it actually takes to build a sustainable life in tech.Richard and Vernon kick off 2026 reflecting on what they’re changing, what they’re rebuilding, and how testing and quality fit into a future shaped by intention rather than hustle. Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 05:19 - The Malazan Book of the Fallen by Steven Erikson14:59 - The $1k Challenge by Ali Abdaal Vernon took part in last year17:23 - The video from Daniel Pink on how to have a successful yearHere's where Daniel talks about having a Challenger Network (but the whole video is 😙🤌🏾)18:46 - Toby SinclairToby's websiteToby's LinkedIn19:24 - Keith KlainKeith's blogKeith's podcastKeith's LinkedIn19:25 - Agile Testing Days conference35:45 - What is Model Drift?41:06 - Glue workTanya's Glue Work presentation which you can read or watchVernon's talk about how glue work impacts Quality Engineers, Testers, etc.48:06 - Gary "GaryVee" VaynerchukGary's websiteGary's YouTube00:00 - Intro 00:54 - Greetings & where have we been? 01:32 - The holidays 02:34 - Rest & mood 04:00 - Routines for success 05:59 - Push-up challenge! 08:35 - Dopamine detox 10:28 - THE EPISODE BEGINS! 10:29 - What are our personal 2026 themes (rather than resolutions)? 10:59 - Rich's 2026 themes 13:10 - Vern's themes 17:58 - Friendship, loneliness, and being the initiator 21:28 - Rich has a two itches. One about writing... 21:56 - ...and another about hats 25:23 - Vern's leadership focus and testing foundations 31:06 - AI work: data mindset, agents, and the vibe coding divide 40:11 - Rant about AI testing being stuck in the past 46:37 - Do "cool" shit and "talk" about it. How to stand out from AI Slop 50:10 - Our podcast themes for 2026

In this episode of the Vernon and Richard show, the hosts engage in light-hearted banter about football before diving into a deep discussion on QA, QE, and testing. They explore the concept of 'shift left' in software development, comparing its application in agile versus waterfall methodologies. The conversation shifts to the evolving roles of QA and QE in the context of AI's impact on the industry, emphasizing the importance of task analysis and building a quality culture within teams. The episode concludes with reflections on managing expectations in QA roles and the future of jobs in the field. 00:00 - Intro 00:48 - Welcome and "Hey" (may contain traces of ⚽️) 04:45 - Olly's first question: Does shift left lend itself more to waterfall (than other methodologies)? 14:41 - Olly's second question: Does this limit how much agile can be used? Is there potentially a new methodology that can emerge from this? 22:31 - Olly's third question (remixed by Rich a little): "...is it more now a case of making people aware that they can, should be considering things ahead of development?" 34:24 - Olly's fourth question: How far can you shift-left before it becomes overstepping? 51:53 - Olly's... which question is this now?! Next question! That works!: Where does the QA role end? Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 04:26 - Olly FairhallOlly's LinkedInHere's a link to what Olly sent us04:45 - Waterfall (in software development)Wikipedia article about the history of the term This article goes into a little more detail about the different phases and characteristics of the model 07:29 - Dan Ashby's (yes DAN'S!) famous diagram is part of his often cited "Continuous Testing" post07:50 - For folks who don't understand that reference, it's... taken (🥁) scene from the movie Taken08:10 - Rich's Whiteboard used to get a lot more love😞 22:31 - Olly's questions and thoughts that are guiding our conversation. Thanks Olly!44:12 - The book "Who Not How" by Dan Sullivan and Dr. Benjamin Hardy46:33 - Elisabeth HendricksonGet Elisabeth's excellent book Explore It!Elisabeth's LinkedIn46:49 - Alan PageAlan's newsletterAlan and Brent's podcastAlan's LinkedIn51:53 - Kelsey HightowerKelsey did a Q&A at Cloud Native PDX and you can listen to the question and answer I was trying to describe here.I urge you to listen to the whole thing. Kelsey is an excellent orator, storyteller, and all-around human ❤️55:33 - Rob SabourinMy quick Perplexity search for Rob's public material on Task AnalysisRob's Linkedin56:59 - Vernon's newsletter "Yeah But Does it Work?!"The issue mentioned is called "What Is The Vaughn Tan Rule and How Does It Impact Testing?" and talks about where we might start with unbundling

This episode is about the struggle to explain, measure, and name the work testers and quality advocates actually do — especially when traditional labels and metrics fall short. Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 05:05 - Defect Detection Rate (DDR)The rate at which bugs are detected per test case (automated or manual)No. of defects found by test team / No. of Test Cases executed) *10015:06 - David Evans' LinkedIn24:57 - Janet GregoryJanet's websiteJanet's LinkedIn26:01 - Defect Prevention RatePerplexity search results here28:28 - Jerry WeinbergJerry's Wikipedia page (his books are highly recommended)49:33 - Shift-Left: The concept of moving testing activities earlier in the software development lifecycyle. Some resources explaining the Shift-Left concept (Perplexity link) 00:00 - Intro01:11 - Welcome & "woke" testing 😳03:15 - QA, QE, Testing… whatever we call it, how do we measure if we're doing a good job?03:44 - Vernon’s first experience with testing metrics: more = better?05:00 - Defect Detection Rate enters the chat06:41 - Rich reverse engineers quality skills needed in the AI era10:54 - How do we know if we’re doing any of this well?12:40 - Trigger warning: the topic of coverage is incoming 😅16:54 - Bugs in production21:09 - Automation metrics: flakiness, pass rates, and execution time24:29 - Can you measure something that didn’t happen? (Prevention metrics)27:43 - Do DORA metrics actually measure prevention?32:03 - Here comes Jerry!33:50 - The one metric the business cares about...36:23 - QA vs QE: whose “quality” are we "assuring"?39:25 - What's the story behind the numbers?48:29 - Rich brings in Shift Left Testing50:14 - Metrics that reach beyond engineering53:14 - Rich gets a new perspective on QE and the business56:50 - Who does this work? Testers? QEs? Or someone else?

In this episode, Richard and Vernon delve into the complexities of Quality Assurance (QA), Quality Engineering (QE), and testing in software development. They explore the evolution of these concepts, their interrelations, and the importance of metrics in assessing quality. The conversation highlights the need for a holistic approach to quality, emphasizing that both prevention and detection of bugs are essential. The hosts also discuss the challenges of defining these terms and the future of quality in the industry. Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 08:50 - Dan AshbyWe're referring to Dan's's excellent post called "Continuous Testing" (featuring his famous diagram!)17:13 - Jit GosaiJit's blog Jit's Quality Engineering Newsletter Jit's LinkedIn19:24 - Quality Talks PodcastStu's Quality Talks podcast that he co-hosts with Chris HendersonStu's LinkedInChris's Linkedin19:55 - The Testing Peers podcast22:00 - DORA Metrics: DORA metrics are a set of key performance indicators developed by Google’s DevOps Research and Assessment team to measure the effectiveness of software delivery and DevOps processes, focusing on both throughput and stability26:13 - A link from Episode 10 where Vern discusses Glue Work (be sure to check out the show notes on that episode)Quick overview of DORA metrics34:43 - The Credibility PlaybookA video course by Vernon as he experiments with building digital products.Check it out and let him know what you think of it! 😊46:24 - Ali AbdaalAli's websiteAli's YouTube00:00 - Intro 01:36 - Welcome 02:40 - Today's topic: What the hell is QA? QE? Testing? And is it all changing? 03:00 - Why is this bugging Rich? 05:11 - Fruit fly tangent 🍌🍊🍎🪰🐝🦋 06:27 - Rich's take on QA, QE, and Testing 08:31 - Vern's take on QA, QE, and Testing 11:15 - Is shift-left testing the same as QE? 13:05 - When the team tests early... is that QE then?! 16:18 - What's the big deal if we can’t define QE clearly? 19:27 - Why the Efficiency Era makes this even harder 22:55 - Trying to draw the Testing, QA, QE, Venn diagram 27:24 - Getting the QA, QE, Testing blend just right. What's the right mix? 29:52 - The kinds of work we take on as our careers grow 34:08 - What Testers get rewarded for 45:34 - How Ali Abdaal helped Vern think differently about quality 48:18 - Rich talks measurement

In this conversation, Vernon and Richard explore the evolving role of AI in quality engineering and software development. They discuss how AI can enhance quality control processes, the importance of embedding quality early in the development cycle, and the potential challenges and opportunities that arise from integrating AI tools. The conversation also touches on the need for skill development and community engagement in adapting to these changes, as well as the implications for roles within the industry. Description and Thumbnail made with AI to assess the quality, we had to! 00:00 - Intro01:02 - Welcome and footy ⚽️02:15 - Today's topic: The impact that AI may or may not have on Quality Engineering03:22 - Rich's wild idea about AI and software quality14:10 - Vern asks a clarifying question22:45 - Communities of excellence… for machines?!24:03 - Vern thinks there's an obvious risk that follows from this idea...31:31 - Rich addresses the risk (Oracles, prompts, and tester superpowers)36:13 – Reflection: the hidden skill AI forces on us41:40 – Shifting in all directions (not just left)43:04 - Feeding your past self into an AI: smart or scary?45:53 – Operation 400 subscribers (and bot listeners)47:13 – Tony Bruce calls us out on sloppy show notes and outro Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 04:18 - Shift-Left: The concept of moving testing activities earlier in the software development lifecycyle.Some resources explaining the Shift-Left concept (Perplexity link)25:35 - Rob BowleyRob's LinkedInThe post Vernon referred to......a follow-up post not long after that one too!26:40 - Alan PageAlan and Brent's podcastAlan's LinkedIn34:43 - Saskia CoplansDigital Interruption Saskia's cybersecurity consultancyREXscan Saskia's automated mobile application vulnerability scannerSaskia's LinkedIn (highly recommended follow)41:49 - Paul ColesPaul Coles published 3 of his 4 part series "The Subtle Art of Hearding Cats" over on Dev.To Recommended reading!Paul's LinkedIn43:09 - Maaret PyhäjärviMaaret's websiteMaaret's blogMaaret's LinkedIn

In this episode of the Vernon Richard show, the hosts discuss their experiences with AI tools and agents, focusing on the challenges and lessons learned from using these technologies in coding and software engineering. They explore best practices for utilizing AI effectively, the importance of context in interactions with AI, and the future of AI agents in the workplace. The conversation highlights the balance between leveraging AI for efficiency while maintaining control and understanding of the underlying processes. Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 09:16 - The LinkedIn post talking about Replit messing with someone's production code 😳And the link to the thread of person who went through itThe tool in question, Replit13:01 - Rich's LinkedIn post with his tips14:21 - GitHub Copilot18:09 - VS Code29:01 - Folks at different ends of the "AI Enthusiasm Spectrum"On the enthusiastic endJason Arbon is on the positive side and is always creating something interesting like...testers.aiOn the unenthusiastic endKeith Klain has created a reading list to help get us up to speed...Keith's reading AI reading listYou can see his full resources list hereMaaike Brinkhof has a bunch of thought-provoking posts on the topic......like this oneand this one34:44 - Want to know what "conflabulation" means? Listen to Martin explain it on the Ghost in th code podcast (that's not a typo!)37:24 - What is Context Engineering? Perplexity has answers!46:38 - The legendary Lt. Geordi La Forge from Star Trek: The Next Generation.51:48 - After recording, the very cool Paul Coles published his article The Subtle Art of Herding Cats: Why AI Agents Ignore Your Rules (Part 1 of 4, explaining the topic of Context Engineering. It’s brilliant!59:04 - The promises of technology over the years...60:50 - The always insightful Meredith Whittaker of Signal fame, where is the president and services on its board of directors, explains the privacy and security concerns with agentic technology. Watch the clip, then go back and watch the whole thing! 00:00 - Intro01:17 - Welcome01:30 - TANGENT BEGINS... All kinds of egregious waffling follows. Skip to the actual content at 08:3401:31 - Rich VS Tree Stump01:57 - What on earth did Rich need the pulley for?02:26 - Vern's nerdy confession and pulley confusion02:52 - Does Rich live next door to Tony Stark?!03:22 - What to do when you need a steel RSJ03:35 - We admit defeat. 03:36 - Welcome to Rich's Garden Adventures Podcast!07:25 - What has Vern been up to?08:34 - We attempt to segue into the episode at last!08:35 - TANGENT ENDS...08:51 - Rich’s POC: using agents to help build AI tools09:45 - The Replit disaster: vibe coding meets deleted production data 11:12 - Sociopathic assistants and the case for AI gaslighting 11:55 - Vernon wants his team experimenting with AI tools12:50 - Rich explains the context for his latest AI adventures13:18 - Rich’s bench project and “putting the engineering hat on” 15:22 - Setting up the stack and staying in control 16:53 - A familiar story: things were going fine until they weren’t 17:00 - Ask vs Edit vs Agent mode in Copilot explained 19:06 - The innocent linting error that spiralled out of control 21:16 - Stuck in a loop: “I didn’t know what it was doing, but I let it keep going” 22:11 - The fateful click: “I’m going to reset the DB” 23:10 - The aftermath: no data, no damage… but very nearly 23:33 - Security wake-up call: agents are acting as you 24:39 - You can’t fix what you don’t know it broke 25:52 - Can you interrupt an agent mid-task? 27:14 - When agents get “are you sure?” moments 28:15 - Tea breaks as a dev strategy: outsourcing work to agents 29:24 - Jason Aborn vs Keith & Maaike: where Rich sits on the AI enthusiasm spectrum 30:41 - Tip1. The first of Rich’s 6 agent tips: commit after every interaction32:12 - Why trusting the “keep all” button is risky 34:01 - Writing your own commits vs letting the agent do it 35:26 - When agents lose the plot: reset instead of fixing 36:55 - “You’re insane now, GPT. I’m giving you a break.” 37:54 - Tip 2: Make the task as small as possible 39:59 - The middle ground between 'ask' and full agent delegation 41:12 - Tip 3: Ask the agent to break the task down for you 43:36 - The order matters: why you shouldn’t start with the form UI 44:33 - Vernon compares it to shell command pipelines 45:09 - It can now open browsers and run Playwright tests (!) 46:23 - Star Trek and the rise of the engineer-agent hybrid 47:57 - Tips 4–6: Test often, review the code, use other models 49:39 - Pattern drift and the importance of prompt templates 50:51 - Vernon’s nemesis: m dashes, emojis, and being ignored by GPT 51:48 - Context engineering vs prompt engineering 52:43 - When codebases get too big for agents to cope 53:40 - Why agents sometimes act dumber than your IDE 54:32 - The danger of outsourcing good practices to AI 54:48 - Spoilers: Rich’s upcoming keynote at TestIt 55:01 - Agents don’t ask why — they just keep going 56:42 - Goals vs loops: when failure isn’t part of the plan 58:32 - The question of efficiency: is training agents worth it? 59:47 - Rich’s take: we’ll buy agents like we buy SaaS 61:08...

In this episode of the Vernon Richard Show, Richard and Vernon discuss the challenges and opportunities in coaching software engineers on quality engineering. They explore personal updates, family dynamics, and the importance of perspective in quality and risk management. The conversation delves into the significance of code quality, effective communication, and the role of engineers in ensuring quality. They also touch on the need for hands-on learning and practical application in quality engineering training, concluding with a call to action for listeners to share their experiences and insights. Links to stuff we mentioned during the pod: 01:16 - Llandegfan Exploratory Workshop in Testing aka LLEWTYou can read about the latest edition from James (I haven’t written anything up yet - VR)19:57 - The “I just want to write code” LinkedIn postFAILURE! I couldn’t find the LinkedIn post I was referring to 😭22:29 - Linda Van De Vooren (massive brain freeze - I couldn't remember Linda's last name properly! Sorry Linda 🤦🏾‍♂️)25:04 - Cul-de-sacThis is a French term (that means "bottom of the bag") that we use in English to describe a dead-end street, i.e. a street that only has one entry/exit point.We also use it in the context Vernon just did, to indicate a situation where we have no options.31:45 - The Deep Dive tracks at Agile Testing Days look incredible! Get your tickets ASAP folks!They also have an Online Pass available if you're unable to visit Berlin (although if you can, we recommend visiting in person!)34:20 - Rich's Qt testing articlesWhere Does AI Fit in the Future of Software Testing?Applying the SACRED Model to Build Reliable Automated TestsThe Importance of Technical System Knowledge4 Essential Types of Automated API TestingExploring the Different Types of Automated UI TestingThe Manual Testing and Automated Testing Paradox42:11 - PeersCon tickets are available now. If you're in the UK and can easily get to Nottingham, I highly recommend visiting!Don't forget they also need VolunPeers (do you see what they did there?), before and during the event, so check that out too please 🙏🏾43:55 - Heather Reid Heather's blog Heather's LinkedIn46:15 - Liza, the awesome teammate in question46:41 - European Testing Conference led by Maaret PyhäjärviWhile the event has stopped, you can still take a peek at their website00:00 - Intro00:48 - Welcome ramble05:25 - Rich's question: An Engineer colleague wants to be coached on Quality Engineering, what do I do?08:24 - Vern goes into coaching mode (shock!)09:35 - Vern goes into teaching mode (shock!)10:04 - Where could we start?12:25 - Risk enters the chat...14:50 - Quality enters the chat...15:48 - Help them speak up and become a QA (Question Asker)17:30 - Two powerful questions to get them thinking about quality19:15 - The dangers of acting like an order taker...19:57 - ...or are they?21:45 - Uno Reverse! Is it true that all Engineers "love" writing code?23:18 - Order Takers vs Experts24:30 - Another powerful question to ask25:47 - Rich's clarification sparks an idea about hats27:17 - Slalom Sponsorship Appeal27:41 - How do you decide when you have learned enough on a given topic?29:21 - Majors and minors30:55 - Learning modalities31:42 - Learning tools35:00 - A "syllabus" or roadmap starts to emerge36:50 - What can the Engineer do to help the QEs in their life?43:29 - Send us your ideas please45:54 - The 1-to-many approach47:53 - The classic mistake to avoid in this situation49:15 - The relationship between testing and quality52:10 - Vernon's people will contact Slalom's people