Umamaheswaran

QA Automation: Myths, Truths, and What Actually Matters

QA automation is often hailed as the silver bullet for ensuring quality at scale. But anyone who’s spent time in the trenches knows it’s not that simple. While automation is powerful, it’s also misunderstood. Here are a few truths we need to accept if we want to use it wisely:

Same Sprint Automation is a Myth

In theory, we automate as we develop. In practice? Requirements shift, dev work runs late, and by the time QA gets a stable build, the sprint’s almost over. Writing robust automation scripts in the same sprint as feature development sounds ideal, but more often than not, it’s a trap that sets teams up for tech debt and flaky tests.

Automation Will Never Find a New Bug

Automation is great for regression. It checks what you already know should work. But it won’t stumble upon that one weird bug that only shows up when you resize the browser while saving a form.

100% Automation Coverage is a Trap

The idea of automating everything is appealing—but maintaining it? Brutal. Every UI change, logic tweak, or backend update can break dozens of tests. You end up spending more time fixing tests than finding actual issues. Focus on automating high-value, stable flows instead.

Automation Has No Context

Automation doesn’t understand the why behind a feature. It can’t tell if the user experience feels off or if a new behavior breaks a business rule. A tester can. That’s why exploratory testing is still gold.

Flaky Tests Do More Harm Than Good

If a test passes sometimes and fails other times, it’s not helping anyone—it’s just adding noise. Flaky tests erode trust in your automation suite and slow everyone down. Quality over quantity is key here.

A Passed Test ≠ A Working Feature

Just because all tests are green doesn’t mean the feature actually works. It just means nothing failed in the ways you expected it to. Real-world users will always use your app in ways you didn’t plan for.

Exploratory Testing is Still Underrated

Sometimes, the best way to find a bug is to poke around, ask questions, and try weird things. No test script would’ve covered that one misalignment caused by a localization quirk—but your tester might spot it in seconds.

Final Thoughts

Automation is essential, but it’s not magic. It should complement human testing, not replace it. Let’s stop chasing unrealistic goals like “same sprint automation” or “100% code coverage” and focus on what actually makes software better: thoughtful testing, smart prioritization, and a healthy mix of human + machin