When testers talk about SUT (System Under Test) there seem to be an implied context of it being software, developed, bespoke software to be specific. Let me broaden the notion of a SUT using Wardley Maps and with that illustrate how testing can add value across the board.
Bespoke software (aka Custom built) is where the solution (SUT) is built and maintained tailormade to a specific company by a specific team that answers to order giver. When you build and maintain an app or web site for a company and is embedded in the team delivering the code base – it’s usually in a bespoke context.
Experiment/emerging example: Built an internal web site to do some simple public service case management. Write it based on MicroSoft .Net and IIS technology. The solution is new and novel, so interaction with the user is important.
All the commotion on buiding MVP experiments and interaction with the Product Owner are usual symptoms of a genesis situation. As the processes mature and products emerge, the solution development becomes more an customization activity.
Customization example: Implement Dynamics 365, SiteCore, SalesForce etc – but taylor and code them to your specific purpose. I have worked in a project taking Dynamics 365O and creating custom forms to handle public sector health events.
The last class of software “development” is the pureplay configurations of standard solutions. This is the context of SaaS – pay the license and get started. Think SAP or Office Applications, anything that is so accepted that it’s almost free (OpenOffice) and kills the IT department.
Let me draw this on the axis of Wardley Maps Evolutions:
Similarly we can add the underlying infrastructure to the drawing. As solutions move to the cloud and infrastructure becomes code, the system under test could very well be code around infrastructure. Initially bespoke infrastructure experiments (in perl?), and as time moves – even infrastructure becomes a commodity in the form of Amazon S3.
So where is your SUT? – what is the path down the stack? Because there is a huge difference between testing custom code for cloud services, as compared to product customization on actual physical owned hardware.
Let’s think testing outside the bespoke areas on the map too. Some current examples I am working on are:
- Infrastructure transition of 700 serves from being owned to being hosted
- Application transition of 50+ applications from being owned to being outsourced
- Transformation of a standard form management solution
- Implementing a standard system for ITIL case management
These projects have no code, the SUT is either a server, an environment (collection of servers), a form, a process or something else. While we do know a lot about testing in bespoke software contexts, the practices for testing in transition and transformation are emerging practices! This gives us and extra layer. And this is where it gets interesting.
There are plenty of standard practices (SAFe, agile..) but the practices for testing in the context of transition is yet to materialize.
The same model can be applied to IT as a whole. IT support and end user computing (devices, desktop operation) are to the very far right as commodity services. While on the far left is the constant experimentation and tinkering (of AI, ML and RPA) to become actual products.
If we only see testing as part of building bespoke software we fail – we fail to see the horizontal and vertical contexts, where the testing disciplines can add similar value and impact.
Complexity is a Matter of Perspective 