In modern software development, change is constant. New features, updates, and bug fixes are introduced frequently, often at high speed. But every change carries the risk of breaking existing functionality.
Regression testing addresses this risk. It verifies that recent changes haven't introduced defects or disrupted previously working features. Regression testing is essential for maintaining software quality in Agile development, where iterations are fast and continuous.
Importantly, it is possible to perform regression testing with both automation and manual methods, and both have their benefits. Automation brings speed and scalability. Manual testing adds depth and human insight. Together, they ensure that the product remains stable and reliable as it evolves.
Manual regression testing involves re-running test cases to check if recent code changes have caused new bugs or broken existing features. Testers follow step-by-step test cases without using automation tools.
This type of testing helps ensure that updates, bug fixes, or new features don’t harm the software's core functionality. Testers interact with the application as real users, checking user interfaces, workflows, and system responses.
Manual regression testing is helpful for:
Regression testing must run with every code change to ensure that nothing breaks. However, repeating the same tests during each Agile iteration can strain teams and timelines.
Manual regression testing is time-consuming and resource-intensive. Running full test suites repeatedly can slow down development and delay releases. This challenge makes it important to plan regression testing from the very start.
Effective regression testing needs to be scoped early. If overlooked, it can lead to late-stage failures or costly delays. If overdone, it consumes time and effort that is better spent elsewhere. Striking the right balance is key to prioritizing tests, automating where possible, and reviewing the scope regularly.
Only a well-planned strategy led by experienced QA teams can manage this balance without compromising product quality.
Manual regression testing is crucial for delivering stable and reliable software. It helps teams catch unexpected bugs that may appear after code changes, updates, or bug fixes. Here’s why it’s important:
| Feature | Manual Regression Testing | Automated Testing |
|---|---|---|
|
Execution Speed
|
Slow, as tests are performed manually
|
Fast, with quick execution of test scripts
|
|
Initial Setup
|
No setup is required beyond test cases
|
Requires time and resources to build test scripts
|
|
Cost
|
Higher long-term costs due to manual effort
|
Higher initial cost, but cost-effective over time
|
|
Accuracy
|
Prone to human error
|
Highly accurate and consistent results
|
|
Flexibility
|
Best for UI/UX testing and exploratory testing
|
Limited to predefined scripts and scenarios
|
|
Test Coverage
|
Limited, especially for large applications
|
Broad coverage with repeatable test execution
|
|
Maintenance
|
Easier to adapt to frequent changes
|
Requires script updates after code changes
|
|
Best Suited For
|
Small projects, frequent UI changes, complex scenarios
|
Large projects, repetitive tasks, and regression
|
|
Bug Detection
|
Effective for visual and usability bugs
|
Effective for functional and logic-based bugs
|
|
Time Consumption
|
Time-consuming for large-scale testing
|
Saves time in long-term testing cycles
|
A hybrid approach, i.e., manual and automated testing, often delivers the most reliable results.
Here are key scenarios when it should be used:
Follow these step-by-step guidelines to conduct manual regression testing efficiently:
To make manual regression testing more effective and efficient, it's essential to follow proven best practices.
It is critical that your regression testing identifies and fixes the real problem areas within your application. To make sure you verify and clean up everything in the process, target manual test cases that:
Again, regression testing needs to be executed every time a change occurs.
Manual testing exposes your application's core elements to human engineers' insight and experience. While an automated system can never replicate that vision, it offers substantial time savings, provided you use the right automation tool for your application.
The automation vs. manual testing debate will remain with us unless AI can, one day, faithfully replicate the creativity of a human tester. Until then, accept that the best approach is a blend of automated and manual methods, ensuring maximum coverage with minimal effort.
You need to keep your test suite clean. It should contain test cases only from recent iterations and should not contain any longer active cases. Similarly, your QA engineers should know to continually update test scripts to reflect all the latest code changes. Both efforts will save time on your QA and produce more stable test results.
Any software development and QA phase that has the potential to produce change should be accompanied by pre-planned regression testing. Aim to uncover as many defects and errors as possible early in your Agile production cycle by giving the rigors of manual regression testing time to work.
Finally, turn your regression testing over to experts whenever possible. Outsourcing your QA places the burden of producing a robust core on engineers who are dedicated to the practice. In addition to generating resource savings, an external QA partner can take the lead in pursuing regression testing advantages such as those outlined above.
If you are not a QA expert, outsource. There is more risk involved in trying to turn your development team into regression testing savants than there will ever be in inviting an external partner to share responsibility for your product.
Manual regression testing is essential for ensuring software quality but comes with several challenges. QASource’s expertise and tools help mitigate these challenges to ensure a streamlined and effective testing process.
Maintaining and updating a sizeable manual regression test suite becomes challenging as the application grows.
Solution to the Client: We provided a comprehensive solution by creating end-to-end test cases for the different application modules. This approach ensures complete coverage while reducing the number of cases required. We also automated the end-to-end test cases for greater efficiency. Test case optimization is a crucial step in reducing the size of the test suite. To ensure the test suite remains relevant, we regularly review, update, and refactor the regression test suite. This includes eliminating or retiring redundant test cases and cases no longer applicable and adding new, relevant test cases to align with current application functionality. Our approach prioritizes, selects, and designs test cases to achieve maximum test coverage with the minimum number of test cases.
Manually preparing test data for different test scenarios can result in redundancy and inefficiency. In the financial application, we must deal with crucial data, multiple calculations, multiple formulas, and different test data.
Solution Provided to the Client: Rather than generating numerous identical cases with varying test data for a particular field, we maintained a formula-based Excel sheet with diverse test data and established one case with various inputs and anticipated outcomes. Additionally, we appended the sheet with the test case, guaranteeing that computations are precise and correspond with the projected data.
Solution Provided to the Client: It is recommended that the developer include Acceptance cases within the New Feature ticket to enable early testing by the tester. To prevent email chains, it is advisable to maintain a sheet of Queries and Issues on a centralized page, such as the Confluence page, accessible to all relevant parties (testing team, Dev team, business team). This allows anyone working on the feature to provide feedback on the sheet, facilitating the creation of a defect. Additionally, conducting peer reviews is a prudent approach to ensure comprehensive coverage of the entire functionality.
Manual testing might not cover all the areas due to time constraints
Solution provided to the client: It is recommended that tests be prioritized based on regression areas and risk analysis. Furthermore, performing sanity tests for the unaltered areas and excluding those cases from the test plan is advisable. Additionally, automating instances and executing automation suites for all areas within the regression cycle is highly recommended.
Here are some of the best tools for manual regression testing:
The latest trends in manual regression testing emphasize greater integration with AI and cloud-based tools. By staying updated on these trends and adopting the latest tools and practices, teams can ensure more efficient and effective regression testing processes.
Utilizing AI in regression testing provides several benefits that enhance the testing process's efficiency, accuracy, and effectiveness.
Cloud-based test management tools are becoming essential for teams that work remotely or are distributed globally.
Manual regression testing remains a vital part of software quality assurance. It helps ensure that new updates, bug fixes, or feature enhancements do not negatively impact existing functionality. While automation speeds up repetitive tasks, manual testing is essential for validating user experience, complex workflows, and UI/UX elements that require human judgment. A balanced approach is combining manual testing with automation; it ensures that software is stable, user-friendly, and ready for release.