Skip to main content


Organizations that commence automation in testing may make the mistake of either writing duplicate tests for manual and automated testing or executing the same test manually as well as through the automation tools. This leads to wastage of valuable time and degraded efficiency on the part of the quality assurance team, inevitably slowing down the software deployment and production process manifold.

There are certain classic ways to prevent such common duplication between automation and manual testing, leading to more robust and faster techniques.

Evolution of Mindset

Not every application development project or testing team can use automated testing tools. It requires a higher initial investment but can yield a greater ROI.

It is a misconception that automation can solve all problems and shorten the testing period. Some areas, are extremely hard to automate and may end up consuming more time than manual testing. In such cases, automated and manual testing can work hand-in-hand to effectively test areas they are best at and leave the remaining to the other.

Thus, the idea that automated and manual testing teams are different departments altogether must be dissolved. Where automation is applicable, it must definitely be implemented, but the line of a rational trust on automation must not be crossed.

Improved Test Strategy

When the testing architecture is insufficient and in accordance with the early systems of quality assurance, it is likely to cause several hindrances in the integration process of automated and manual testing modules.

The pipeline should be designed in such a manner that it is able to accommodate the modern techniques and pair them intelligently with the manual counterpart. This requires the involvement of skilled designers who have a stronghold on testing architectures so that they can integrate the automated and manual blocks with the aid of deep understanding and initiate linking of the systems at necessary points of contact.

Such amalgamation will allow a transparent view of test-case designs to both automation and manual testing units and help identify similar cases with great ease, encouraging the minimization of duplication sufficiently.

Knowing how to test

Knowing how to test is a very important aspect in designing a robust test plan and strategy Also the testing process should have a clear demarcation about which tests should be automated and which should be carried out manually.

Test automation must be implemented for application areas where manual testing is often repetitive and tedious. Also, tests that have several steps in common do well with automation.

For instance, parameterization of forms requires unique data on every run, and thus, such testing can be easily automated to secure better consistent returns in a short time. On the other hand, tests like look & feel and exploratory tests should not be automated since it requires a high degree of effort in automating and less reliable.

Increased Team Collaboration

Achieving a healthy collaboration between the automation and manual testing teams is easier said than done. Over time, it may be observed that due to the lack of collaborative measures, duplication of test cases persists and often leads to ambiguous test results.

This happens when the test cases would fail for say, automated testing, and pass for manual testing. This can be prevented if the teams come together to determine what testing technique fits best for the functionality and features under question.

The manual and automation testing teams must not be isolated, such that collaboration commences in formulating which test cases must be handed over to automation.

However, improvisation of communication between the two teams can take time. To catalyze the process, collaboration tools can be used to bring in more clarity and transparency. This way the teams can easily steer clear of duplication.


The prevention of duplication in test efforts has several benefits. It not only saves time but also saves on hardware resources. The additional time can be spent developing better testing techniques and ensuring the deliverance of quality products and services.

Quality engineering is more than tools and tweaks. At Pyramid Consulting, we believe in building sustainable processes to deliver the best digital experience. We have more than 20 years of experience in consulting for successful IT delivery. Connect with our team to know what we can do for you.

Carl Johanson

About the author

Carl Johanson

Practice Director, QA & Testing

Carl has been creating custom, forward-focused and effective QA solutions for Pyramid Consulting since 2012. Implementing the latest tech and thought leadership delights Carl just as it does clients. In his personal life, Carl focuses on doing things right and doing the right things—an important distinction—as efficiently as possible. If you need Carl urgently, check out your local drumming scene or the closest beach, otherwise you can find him at home with his beautiful and ever-growing family.

Cookie Notice

This site uses cookies to provide you with a more responsive and personalized service. By using this site you agree to our privacy policy & the use of cookies. Please read our privacy policy for more information on the cookies we use and how to delete or block them. More info

Back to top