Key Takeaways
- Ad Hoc testing is an unscripted, spontaneous testing approach that relies on tester intuition to find bugs that structured tests might miss.
- There are several types of Ad Hoc testing including Exploratory Testing, Monkey Testing, Buddy Testing, Fault Injection Testing, and Negative Testing.
- Ad Hoc testing offers advantages like quick execution, discovery of unforeseen bugs, minimal documentation requirements, and encouragement of creative thinking.
- Despite its benefits, Ad Hoc testing lacks comprehensive coverage, makes reproducing bugs difficult, and produces inconsistent results compared to structured testing methods.
- Ad Hoc testing works best for tight deadlines, last-minute checks before releases, or exploring new features, but should complement rather than replace structured testing approaches.
While Ad Hoc testing gives you freedom to follow your instincts, finding those elusive bugs requires balancing it with structured approaches for complete coverage. Discover how to effectively implement this powerful technique in your testing strategy 👇
What is Adhoc Testing?
“Do not always rely on plans, go with your instincts.” At least once in our lives, we have heard or seen a phrase similar to this either from our loved ones or from a book or a movie. Can it be true in such a technical field like QA? The answer is yes, and it is exactly what Ad Hoc testing helps you do.
With adhoc testing, you explore your software without a predefined plan, using your instincts to find issues that scripted tests might miss. It’s your creativity and understanding of the system that drive this method.
Adhoc testing is spontaneous and unscripted. Instead of following test cases, you dive into the software and interact with it in unpredictable ways. You may focus on areas you suspect could break or experiment with unconventional user behaviours.
However, it is not random testing. While Ad Hoc testing lacks formal preparation, it is guided by your understanding of the system and potential risk areas. It’s also not a replacement for structured testing methods like functional testing, regression testing, or performance testing or anything else. You still need these structured approaches to cover all bases—Ad Hoc testing simply adds an extra layer to the process.
Types of Ad Hoc testing
Now that you understand the basics of Ad Hoc testing, let’s explore the different types that you might come across. Each of these methods can be very effective when time is tight, and you need to identify defects quickly.
Exploratory Testing
This is the most common form of Ad Hoc testing. Here, you use your gut feelings to explore the application without a predefined script. The goal is to get an intuitive feel for how the software works and discover defects you wouldn’t typically find in a structured test. One study shows that exploratory testing helps you find 29% more bugs than structured approaches.
Example: Imagine you’re testing a new social media app. You don’t follow any specific path but start clicking through various features like uploading photos, sending messages, or updating your profile. Looks like blind exploration, right? But in this specific example, you can find that when uploading a photo larger than a certain size, the app freezes.
People often confuse this with Adhoc, but exploratory testing specifically is exercising a feature to essentially do discovery, which informs your later tests.
PushedbyBoredom
Reddit
- Monkey Testing
This is all about randomness. You might press random buttons or input random data to see if the app can handle it. It’s like giving the software an unexpected challenge by testing its stability and error handling.
Example: You start clicking random buttons on an online shopping website, entering random values for your shipping address, or selecting random payment options. You might notice that, when you click too quickly between different product pages, the site crashes or the cart fails to update.
- Buddy Testing
In buddy testing, you and a colleague team up to test different parts of the application. It’s informal, but it allows you to combine your insights. The two of you explore the software together, finding issues by sharing your findings as you go along. It is also a great opportunity to build strong bonds with your colleagues.
Example: One of you tests the login feature of a banking app by entering incorrect passwords or usernames. Meanwhile, the other checks the “forgot password” link to see if it’s working as expected. By comparing notes, you discover that one error message is misleading.
- Fault Injection Testing
Fault injection is about intentionally breaking the system to see how it reacts. That is it, you literally inject a fault into the system. It means you introduce errors to test its resilience, seeing if the system can handle unexpected situations without crashing.
Example: You intentionally corrupt data files by renaming them or removing parts of the data. When you try to access them, you check how the system handles the errors—does it crash, or does it show a clear error message?
- Negative Testing
Close to fault injection, but just a bit different. In negative testing, you focus on providing incorrect input or using the application in unintended ways. It’s all about seeing how the system reacts to mistakes or failures.
Example: You enter a phone number with too many digits or input a name with special characters. You might find that the form doesn’t catch these errors or fails to alert you, potentially allowing incorrect data into the system.
Each type of Adhoc testing helps you find different kinds of issues—things you might miss in a structured test. However, we should remind you again: it’s important to remember that Adhoc testing isn’t exhaustive. It should always complement structured testing methods for a well-rounded approach.
And for structured methods, you can not always rely on human expertise or instincts; you need a Test Management System (TMS). TMS plays a crucial role in this process by organising and tracking these tests. It ensures that all tests are executed, results are logged, and any defects are properly managed and resolved. If another fellow tester is your partner in buddy testing, then TMS is that buddy in structured methods.
And this is where aqua cloud comes into play. With 100% traceability, test coverage, and AI-powered insights, it helps you streamline your testing efforts, ensuring no area of your application is overlooked. The centralised repository keeps all your test data organised, making it easy to access and review results. Automation or project management integrations like Jira, Selenium and Jenkins help you automate tests, and manage continuous integration. 1-click bug reporting with Capture integrates seamlessly into Jira, speeding up defect resolution. Additionally, aqua cloud helps you generate test cases from requirements in seconds and provides comprehensive test data, saving you valuable time. It’s the perfect tool to complement your structured testing methods. Combine it with your Adhoc testing, and deliver high-quality, bug-free software every time.
Complement your Adhoc testing efforts with a 100% AI-powered solution
Advantages of Adhoc Testing
Now, let’s look at the two sides of the coin, shall we? Adhoc testing has several advantages that make it an appealing choice, especially when speed is essential.
- Quick and Flexible
Adhoc testing is fast because there are no rigid test cases. You simply jump in and start testing, making it perfect when you’re pressed for time.
Example: You need to check if a new feature in your app works under different conditions, and instead of spending time planning, you just start exploring. In minutes, you can already find bugs that might have taken hours to plan for.
- Helps Find Unforeseen Bugs
Since you’re not following structured scripts, you’re likely to discover bugs that wouldn’t be found through traditional testing.
Example: During testing of an e-commerce site, you may randomly select a product, add it to the cart, and then apply a random coupon code. This unexpected journey can reveal a bug that only occurs under this specific scenario.
- No Need for Documentation
You don’t need to write detailed test cases or follow complex procedures, making it a hassle-free method. As most testers hate documentation, this is good news for many.
Example: Instead of writing test scripts for every single step of a user’s journey, you just explore the app, making testing feel natural and less time-consuming.
- Encourages Creativity
You’re not bound by a script, so you can think outside the box. This freedom encourages creative testing and allows you to spot things others may miss.
Example: While testing a calendar app, you may experiment with changing time zones rapidly. Who knows, you can uncover issues that structured testers wouldn’t have even considered.
Ready to put your testing knowledge into action? Try this interactive game where you’ll face 8 real-world scenarios and decide whether to use ad-hoc or structured testing, then see both outcomes side-by-side to learn which approach works best in each context.
Your Mission: Face 8 real-world bug scenarios and decide whether to use Ad-Hoc testing (fast, intuitive) or Structured testing (thorough, documented).
The Twist: After each choice, you'll see BOTH outcomes side-by-side. Learn which approach works best in different contexts!
Disadvantages of Adhoc Testing
While Adhoc testing offers quick results, it also has limitations that you should be aware of.
- Lacks Comprehensive Coverage
Adhoc testing doesn’t follow a structured path, which means it’s easy to miss critical areas of the software.
Example: You might focus on testing the login page but forget to check how the app behaves with low battery or interrupted internet connections. Result? Missing potential bugs in these areas.
- Difficult to Reproduce Results
Because the test steps aren’t documented, it’s hard to replicate the test results exactly. Although you might hate documentation, you still need it, dear testers. Because from time to time, Adhoc testing and its findings can make it difficult to track progress. Without formal test cases, there is little documentation to refer to in the future. If bugs reappear, it will be difficult to understand why they weren’t caught previously.
Example: A bug is found in one session, but when you try to test again, you can’t reproduce the exact conditions. It leaves you unable to resolve the issue effectively.
- Can Be Inconsistent
Since Adhoc testing is driven by intuition and exploration, the process can vary each time and confuse you with inconsistency in results.
Example: One tester might click through the application in a different order than another tester. There is a huge chance of missing or finding different bugs depending on their exploration path.
When to Perform Adhoc Testing?
To conduct Adhoc testing is best suited for situations where speed is critical, and flexibility is required. Here are a few scenarios where it’s particularly useful:
- Tight Deadlines: When you need to quickly check if a feature is working after an update or fix.
- Last-Minute Checks: Before a major release, when you want to ensure there are no remaining issues.
- Exploring New Areas: When new features or changes are introduced that weren’t part of the original test plan.
To conduct Adhoc testing in these cases allows you to jump right in and explore the application without the constraints of formal test cases.
How to Conduct Adhoc Testing? A Practical Example
Let’s go through the process of performing Adhoc testing using a simple example: testing a login feature on a website.
- Understand the Goal
Before you begin to conduct Adhoc testing, know what the login feature should do. Typically, this means verifying that users can log in with valid credentials and are properly prevented from logging in with incorrect ones.
- Familiarise Yourself with the Product
Spend a few minutes exploring the login page. Understand the fields, buttons, and error messages. This gives you a clear base to start your testing.
- Start Exploring
Now that you know the basics, start interacting with the login form. Try different combinations of username and password. For example, enter a valid username but leave the password blank, or enter incorrect credentials. You’re not following a script here, just seeing what happens when you play around with the form.
- Test Different Input Combinations
Try unusual inputs to see if they break anything. Enter special characters or very long text in the fields. This can reveal input validation issues that formal test cases might miss.
- Simulate User Behavior
Test the login feature under real-world conditions. For example, try logging in with the browser’s developer tools open, or test the login on different devices or browsers to spot any inconsistencies.
- Document Main Findings
As you go along, make sure to note down any bugs or unexpected behaviour. Even if they seem minor, they could point to bigger issues.
- Collaborate with Devs
Finally, share your findings with the development team. Discuss the issues you discovered and work together to prioritise them for resolution.
So it is a bit paradoxical, isn’t it? We talk about structure in instinct-based, unstructured methods. But you still need to know what steps or in what order you should implement it, even without formal test scripts.
Tools to Perform Adhoc Testing
While Adhoc testing is less structured and does not require any tools, it still creates some gaps in your testing process, as we saw above. There are tools that can help you close these gaps, making your testing efforts more efficient:
- aqua cloud
aqua provides a unified platform where you can track and document your Adhoc tests. Thanks to 100% traceability, you don’t have to worry about losing track of bugs or test scenarios. The central repository ensures that all your tests, results, and defects are stored in one place for easy access and collaboration. 1-Click Capture integration means a seamless, also visually stunning communication with the devs. aqua’s integrations with Jira, Jenkins, Selenium, or Ranorex allow for seamless defect tracking and test automation. When it comes to speed, aqua is a great competition to Adhoc testing in this manner too. Imagine creating a test case from a requirement in 3 seconds. This means almost spending the same amount of time and effort as Adhoc testing where you don’t need test cases. So, are you ready to jump in?
Match the speed of Adhoc testing with 3-seconds of AI-powered TMS
- Jira
While primarily a bug-tracking tool, JIRA helps document and track any unexpected behaviour you find during Adhoc testing. It’s essential for reporting bugs and collaborating with developers on fixes. aqua’s integration with Jira ensures that any bugs you encounter during your Adhoc testing can be tracked, reported, and resolved faster.
- Selenium
Selenium can be used to quickly automate some of your exploratory testing, especially when testing repetitive actions like logging in or clicking through pages. While it’s not traditional Adhoc testing, it can support your effort by saving time. aqua also works well with Selenium, allowing you to save time and effort.
- Postman
Perfect for API testing, Postman helps you quickly send requests, check responses, and spot issues.
Conclusion
So, what did we learn? Adhoc testing offers flexibility and quick insights into your software’s behaviour, especially when structured test plans might not fit the situation. It thrives in situations that require fast problem identification and when you need to think creatively to uncover issues. Remember, though, it’s not a standalone approach; structured and modern testing methods like AI test management still play a critical role in ensuring comprehensive coverage.
Bankingaqua ALM helps banks increase testing productivity by over 50%
