Manual testing is the "default" kind of testing. Opening up a website and simply clicking on a button to see if it works already counts as manual testing.
In this article, we'll explore the concept of manual testing and what makes it different from its counterpart (automation testing).
Manual testing is a testing approach where testers manually interact with software/app to check its quality without the help of automated testing tools or test scripts.
Manual testers interact with the system like how an end user would to identify bugs in the software that can create friction in the user experience.
For large-scale testing project where there are thousands and millions of items and features to test, QA teams usually automate their work to boost efficiency. However, manual testing is still needed for scenarios where it's impossible to automate.
Any type of testing can be executed both manually and with the help of an automation tool. The final decision to choose which approach lies in the nature of that specific test case.
However, there are some testing types that usually can't be automated, and must be done manually. They are:
To be human is to be creative and intuitive, and in certain types of testing those 2 factors are a must-have.
Manual testing allows testers to ask questions like “What if I do it this way?” - and this liberty of experimentation is something automation testing just won’t be able to deliver.
Remember: automation testing only follows a predetermined set of test steps. It can only do what we script it to do. Meanwhile, manual testing allows testers to do whatever they want, including breaking the app, which usually reveals bugs nobody knows to have existed in the first place.
In other words, automation testing takes us to the Known Known zone, while manual testing allows us to venture into the Known Unknown and Unknown Unknown.
Manual testing is flexible. If the requirements change, testers can quickly adjust their approach without needing to update scripts or code. This makes it easier to test new or modified features on the spot.
To do manual testing is to experience the application in the same way an end user would, and almost anyone can become an end user.
Manual testers, of course, must have enough technical knowledge and experience to know how to best “break” the app, but other than that they don’t need programming skills or engineering expertise to create test scripts like an automation tester. The low learning curve of this approach allows teams to start testing quickly at limited resources.
A huge roadblock to many automation testing adopters is the maintenance cost and effort.
Many companies cut automation out of their tech-stack to escape the need for constantly revising their automation test scripts when their code changes, or else their test scripts become obsolete and no longer reliable.
On the other hand, manual testing does not require any test case maintenance: when a code update occurs, testers can adapt immediately.
Manual testing requires testers to execute each and every step manually. It is fine for small projects, but for those with hundreds to thousands of test cases, manual testing is just counter-productive.
Moreover, humans cannot process data as fast as machines, and we are prone to fatigue and distraction. If a mistake occurs, testers must repeat steps, further extending the testing time.
Each manual test execution is independent. A new execution requires testers to repeat all steps from the beginning. This leads to:
While manual testing does not require specialized tools or scripting, the long-term cost can be high due to the need for more testers, longer testing cycles, and repeated effort for the same test cases. Companies often underestimate these costs when scaling their testing process.
Read More: How To Calculate Test Automation ROI?
Manual testing takes longer to identify and report defects. Since execution is slower, bugs may be discovered late in the development cycle, increasing the effort required for debugging and fixing them. This delay can impact release schedules and software quality.
Manual testers follow the Software Testing Life Cycle to check the system.
Automation testing involves executing test cases automatically either through reusable test scripts or with the help automation testing tools. It is the much needed counterpart of manual testing.
Read More: What is Automation Testing?
Both manual testing and automation testing have their strengths and weaknesses. In practice, a combination of both approaches often yields the best results, with manual testing for exploratory and usability aspects and automation testing for repetitive and resource-intensive tasks.
You can have a look at the table below to better understand the differences between the 2 approaches:
|
Aspect |
Manual Testing |
Automation Testing |
|
Tester Involvement |
Human testers execute test cases manually. |
Automated tools execute test cases automatically. |
|
Test Case Execution |
Test cases executed manually without tools. |
Test cases executed by automation scripts. |
|
Suitable for |
Exploratory testing, usability testing, |
Regression testing, performance testing, |
|
Testing Types |
Ad-hoc testing, small projects. |
Large-scale testing, repetitive tasks. |
|
Human Intervention |
Requires human intervention for each test case. |
Limited human intervention after script setup. |
|
Error Prone |
Prone to human errors and subjectivity. |
Reduces human errors, increases repeatability. |
|
Project Scale |
Suitable for small projects or when test cases change frequently. |
Suitable for large and complex projects with consistent requirements. |
|
Efficiency |
Time-consuming for repetitive or large-scale testing. |
Efficient for repetitive tasks and regression testing. |
|
Initial Setup |
Simpler initial setup; doesn't require scripting skills. |
Initial setup requires scripting skills and may take longer. |
|
Adaptability |
Offers more flexibility in adapting to changes. |
Less adaptable to changes in the application. |
|
Speed of Execution |
Slower compared to automated testing. |
Faster test execution once scripts are set up. |
In the long run, automation brings good ROI. According to the State of Quality Report 2024, “the percentage of respondents reporting high to very high ROI increases from groups adopting automation for less than a year to those exceeding five years”. In other words, although initially automation testing requires a lot of investment and training as compared to manual testing, the benefit is totally worth it over time.
Read More: Manual Testing vs Automation Testing
To ensure that the manual testing process go smoothly, the QA team should have solid test management practices in place. Google Sheet has a default template for test management that you can use for reference.
Why this sheet works:
Note: this spreadsheet is only suitable for small-scale testing project. For large-scale testing project, it is recommended to have a dedicated test case management system.
Popular test case management tools include:
Katalon is a comprehensive quality management platform supporting test management for both manual testing and automation testing on web, API, mobile across a wide variety of environments, all in 1 place, with minimal engineering and programming skill requirements.
Katalon is a great addition to your manual testing techstack, helping you manage your day-to-day testing activities such as:
In other words, Katalon gives you the capabilities of all of the tools you use everyday with specific customization for testing.
For example, for test planning, once you have activated Katalon TestOps, you can create a test project and schedule a test release, with detailed information on test case status, start date, and release date.
If you have a JIRA integration, you can click the “Populate JIRA release” button to import your existing JIRA test plan.
You can easily add your test cases in Katalon TestOps. The folders are displayed in a tree view in the left sidebar. Below is the Project Dashboard for the Web UI Tests Project for an eCommerce website, and in the Test Cases folder you can find the Order and check out a single product test case.
You can click on the test case to edit its details.
For reports on your manual testing efforts, Katalon highlights your testing activities with real-time data, which is categorized into 3 components:
These reports can all be shared automatically via email to the relevant stakeholders of your choice.
In addition to all of that, Katalon has a Slack - Microsoft Teams integration to allow you to send test reports to a Slack/Teams channel for enhanced collaboration and communication, resulting in a unified testing approach.
If you want to experience the Katalon Platform, there is a Free Forever version and 30-day Free Trial that allows you to fully enjoy its capabilities.
Start Testing With Katalon Platform Free Trial
The decision to prioritize manual or automation testing is based on factors like:
A general rule of thumb is that test cases with higher complexity and low repetitiveness should be conducted manually to ensure that there is human input to the test, while repetitive test cases are generally automated so that testers can focus on other value-generating activities
Manual testing does not require coding skills. Testers manually execute test cases and validate software functionality without writing code.
Test scenarios in manual testing are detailed descriptions of possible interactions, conditions, and actions that users might undertake with the software. They guide testers in conducting tests, ensuring various functionalities are adequately validated.
A user story in manual testing is a concise, informal description of a feature's functionality from an end user's perspective. It helps testers understand the context and purpose of testing, enabling effective test case creation.
To test a website manually, testers navigate through its various pages, functionalities, and features. They validate links, forms, user interactions, responsiveness, and visual aspects. Additionally, they perform boundary tests, input validations, and compatibility checks across browsers and devices.
Read More: A Complete Web QA Checklist