The truth about crowdtesting
How enthusiastic are you about handing over your precious digital asset to an unruly rabble? Not very, obviously. That’s the problem many people have with the idea of crowdtesting.
When we think of a crowd, we think of uncontrolled, excitable, riotous groups of people packed together and jostling. It’s an unfortunate connotation that undermines the concept of crowdtesting.
If it’s not the idea of rampaging hordes that’s putting you off, there are plenty of other clichés that are repeated over and over by opponents of crowdsourced testing. Inconsistency, poor quality and a lack of security and confidentiality for example.
Under the right circumstances, groups are remarkably intelligent.
James Surowiecki, The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few
Full disclosure: at Digivante, we provide crowdtesting services, so you can guess that we’re not among the denouncers. But we also provide a range of other specialised QA services. In fact, we don’t recommend crowdsourced QA testing as a catch-all solution to every testing requirement. So we have a degree of objectivity and balance in our views.
Most importantly, we have a lot of experience working with demanding brands and businesses who rely on their digital products and customer experiences to deliver revenue, profit and growth consistently and stay ahead of the competition . We wouldn’t be able to retain those clients if crowdtesting were of no value — it’s a key element of the solutions we offer them.
If you’re sceptical about crowdtesting platforms, or if you’ve only heard about its pitfalls and shortcomings, this article is for you. Our experts tackle seven common assumptions about professional crowdtesting, to help you weigh up the benefits and decide for yourself whether it could deliver value as part of your digital testing approach.
The evidence: reframing seven common assumptions about crowdtesting
#1 Crowdtesting is a differentiated activity – it’s not a commodity service
Crowdtesting providers often talk about the size of their crowdtesting community. That gives the impression that it’s all about the numbers of testers they have signed up. The scale and scope of the worldwide testing crowd means that in theory, anyone and everyone can get involved.
This creates a perception that one crowd software testing service is very much like another – potentially using the same freelance testers to deliver the same activities as every other provider. If that’s the case, crowdtesting is just a commodity service and the challenge is to find the cheapest provider possible.
The fundamental misunderstanding behind this assumption is that crowdsourced testing is a single, homogenous service. In fact, crowdtesters can deliver a whole range of different testing services and approaches. A large crowdtesting community is useful, in that there are more resources to process more workload more quickly, but it’s the quality and skills of the crowdtesters that count for any individual project or QA brief.