I’m currently exploring how “Wardley maps” can be applied in strategies for testing. Here is an example of how I used a map to understand and work with risks.
In my current projects the system under test is not software development, but rather a end-2-end transition of IT services. The technology is part reinstallation, part spin up of containers – in other words, some elements are more or less commoditized. Also some elements are more or less visible to the stakeholder. It seems like a good fit for a Wardley map….
First I need to tailor the horizontal axis a bit. I have read up on the articles by Simon Wardley and Ben Mosior with regards to the framing of “evolution”. For a quick intro read Erik Schön describes the four stages, like this:
- Genesis: the unique, the very rare, the uncertain, the constantly changing and the newly discovered. Our focus is on exploration.
- Custom Built: representing the very uncommon and that which we are still learning about. It is individually made and tailored for a specific environment. It is bespoke. It frequently changes. It is an artisan skill.
- Product (+ rental): the increasingly common, the manufactured through a repeatable process, the more defined, the better understood. Change becomes slower here. Whilst there exists differentiation particularly in the early stages there is increasing stability and sameness.
- Commodity (+ utility): scale and volume operations of production, the highly standardized, the defined, the fixed, the undifferentiated, the fit for a specific known purpose and repetition, repetition and more repetition.
There is also a relevant article, where Evolution is the level of ambiguity – which is just one of the relationships Wardley Mapping have with the Cynefin Framework.
The key legend to the horizontal axis is the relative position from unknown/uncharted to embedded/industrialized – to you or the organization being mapped. It’s possible to tailor the labels specifically to the components being mapped – like the legends of altitude lines, buildings and roads on a map. Here’s one for the specific risk context above:
|Elaboration||We don’t know the risks yet||We see these risks.||Risks are stabile.||Risks are reduced to standard components|
First I map the system landscape: relative to the business vertically and relative to Risk stage horizontally. It gives me this anonymized map:
It’s probably only half-way right, but with this I can consider:
- How far can I move the elements to the right?
- What inertia blocks movement?
- Which ones can I move the furthest?
With the map (position and movement) I can consider what happens when risks change and evolves – how does evolution affect the test strategy?
If we automate Configuration, the risk is significantly reduced.
Reinstallation can only get us to a certain point, due to:
8 thoughts on “Making a Map of Risks”
[…] how Wardley maps can be applied for preparing test strategies: Visualize the Test Strategy, Making a Map of Risks, Broaden the scope of the SUT – let’s look at how we can align the business and […]
[…] activities. Yet the more complicated and complex even the low-code solutions become, the more important it is to maintain and test. .. and that’s where the automation best practises come in. Visual Tests are […]
[…] data from one platform to another. This time around the program was about transition of hosting and application delivery. Same same – just very […]
[…] numerous times that this is not how you build trust and collaboration – nor when handling systems that are not stable – nor when the subject matter experts test. You cannot structure yourself out of a complex […]
[…] Not all risks make us prepare deliberate activities to be performed in advance of starting a fight. Not all risks make us prepare testing activities. The risks that we do prepare/test for are when our feelings about something that may happen will be […]
[…] rigor you add to the requirements management – the more fragile it becomes. It’s key to understand the risks and bets of the person paying for your solution. – in that lies the true borders of the […]
[…] Making a Map of Risks, 2022, […]