Worksoft Certify Previous Solutions

JZ
QA Manager at Carrier Global Corp.

It's far easier than other solutions. We previously had HP Quality Center and we could not maintain it. Prior to my taking over testing, they had implemented that tool. They brought in some outside contractors who did the initial automation and they handed it off to the support team to maintain. But it was so complex to update it when there was an error, or just for general maintenance that needed to be done, that they found it easier to just manually test. They quit using the tool. It was a complete waste.

With Worksoft, in stark contrast, there was a little bit of a learning curve up front because for about 70 percent of your effort you can use its record function that just records your keystrokes. But then you have to go in and harden the script, and put in data tables and screenshots and validations, that type of stuff. But compared to the other tool, there are no real programming skills needed. You learn how to use the functions and when you look at the script or the test, it's not like looking at code. You can actually read it and say, "Oh okay, that's inputting the month and the year," or "That's validating that the sales order posted." It's in English and it's very clear to follow. There's a drag-and-drop, and delete and all the things that you're used to using with other applications, like Word and Excel, that makes it very simple to use. Initially we had a little bit of training involved, but since then it has been incredibly easy compared to the old tool. The old tool didn't make it past a couple of years. It's been four years with Worksoft and we've got interest, globally, from other parts of the company that are asking, "When are you going to automate our regression suite?" So it has been very well received.

View full review »
JN
Enterprise Architect SAP Solutions at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees

It is pretty powerful as compared to other tools. We developed our own tool, and we have also compared it with Micro Focus. We have some knowledge of QTP from HP and Tosca Tricentis. From my perspective, especially when it comes to debugging and also object recognition, Worksoft may be one or two years ahead as compared to the other tools.

View full review »
HW
IT Program Manager at Applied Materials

Our initial goal was regression testing. It was really expensive. It was throwaway work. We always had to outsource it. It overlapped other test cycles within a project. So, all the functional business folks were busy. It was something that if we left it up to the project resources, they didn't do a very good job with it. We would bring in manual testers almost literally off the street. They didn't know our processes. They ended up having to interact with our project resources anyway. It was just a mess. It was inefficient, clunky, expensive, and the quality was poor. 

We knew that we had a lot of SAP implementations coming up because we had acquired several new companies. So, we made the decision at that time that we needed to automate regression testing. That was our first initial goal, and we've hit that. During our last major SAP implementation project. Our regression coverage was at 90 percent which is pretty much the top you can ever really expect. Now, we are looking at other use cases.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
Worksoft Certify
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about Worksoft Certify. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
MR
SAP Manager at a logistics company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We were previously using Micro Focus UFT. The tool was good, and we did not have a lot of problems with it. The only problem was SAP changes a lot of things every time. The frequent changes were causing a lot of issues for us in terms of automation. We were able to automate many things, but the maintenance was a big problem for us. 

  1. You needed to have a person who had the coding knowledge to do it.
  2. The frequent changes made the scripts useless. Then, we would have to come back and redo a lot of things. 

This is where we were looking for a product where we could have minimum maintenance that anybody can automate. This is the concept why we came into Worksoft.

View full review »
WF
Global ERP Test Manager at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees

It was all manual. For convenience, we used Micro Focus ALM for tracking our manual tests. We still use that as our central hub for our test documentation. We weren't using any test automation tools in IT. Within the organization, we have R&D groups that develop software for various systems and medical devices. Those teams are running tests and code. They are in automation test suites, and I was part of one of those teams before joining IT. However, in IT, before we started using Certify, we weren't using any test automation.

Manual testing was costing us a huge amount of money. We did a double rollout of SAP. We split it over three deployments:

  • With deployment one, it was just one division in North America. We had over a 120 people doing manual testing for a period of about sixteen weeks. Add up the cost of that. 
  • As we moved into deployment two, we were going to have to test new functionality and also regression test what we'd already booked. If you took the amount of testing that we'd done in deployment one, even if we weren't going to redo all of that, we're going to have to do 50 percent of that. It was going to be a huge manual effort and a sunk cost. We'd put all that money into manual testing and wouldn't have an asset. It would be money that we are basically suspending with no reuseability.

It was a pretty easy decision to convince the team to move to automation because it would be an asset that we could reuse again. Over the last five years, we've shown that we've had a positive ROI on it. The initial upfront cost in terms of licenses, plus all the money that we spent developing tests, has proven it's worth. Now, we can do a regression test suite in ten days as opposed to sixteen weeks.

View full review »
Priyanka-Agarwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Quality Assurance Project Manager at Accenture

We have introduced other tools like Tosca which we use as a codeless tool because it wasn't possible for us to automate through Worksoft. Where there are web application limitations in Worksoft, we switch to Tosca.

View full review »
WN
Configuration Owner at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Before Worksoft Certify, we needed almost two weeks or more of regression testing to move our changes from regression to production. We were spending more than 10,000 euros for that on top of our man-hours. Even then, it was not proper testing because the user could manipulate things because they were using manual testing. For example, if something was not working, they could try to use some other way to work it. After the implementation of Worksoft Certify, we have increased our scope for regression and have more than 162 processes from all the models. We have also increased the test coverage and have less issues.

We went from two weeks and 200 man-hours to three days of testing. Within three days, we can test for the monthly release. For the weekly release, we need maybe one day or less using Worksoft Certify to test our releases and move them to production. It has really improved the collaboration between teams and our dependencies between various processes. On top of that, it provides really quick reports and results for management. We are capable of providing quicker reports and results for regression, like, "What has happened? What has gone wrong? Is everything okay to move to production?" Management is also very happy with it because it is saving time and money.

View full review »
PP
Principal Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

As a partner, we help our customers to invest in the right tools and platform. So, we educate our customers to buy Worksoft Certify. We help them to build a business case or plan and do a joint PoC with Worksoft. We enable and empower our customers with enough details and help them to invest in the right automation tool for SAP, which is Worksoft Certify.

Some of our customers do not have any tools in their landscape. In that case, it is easy to position Worksoft Certify. Other customers already have other automation tools in their landscape in which they are experiencing a lot of pain points with their automation tool. They invested a lot of money in their automation tools and framework, but they did not realize the benefits. Therefore, we help those customers move away from their existing tools to Worksoft Certify. If they decide to build on their existing tool and use Worksoft Certify, it's a very complicated decision. We need to build a very strong business case and we also need to help the customers to migrate the automation test suite.

View full review »
SG
Testing & Quality Assurance Manager at Johnson Matthey Plc

We have always been heavily reliant on manual testing and as a result, regression testing was not systematic and we could never think of implementing frequent weekly regression test cycles which was challenging. We decided to go ahead with automated testing and use Certify because:

  1. Manual regression testing takes a lot of time and resourcing is always a challenge.
  2. Regression testing not being systematic, the quality was very difficult to measure as we did not have a standard set of manual regression test scripts/sufficient documentation.
  3. There was a delay in our time-to-market because all the testing was being done manually and there was no way we could accommodate frequent, weekly, regression test cycles. That meant high business risk, that we would have more defects in the production environment/ more associated costs.

We had all these challenges and we started exploring options to mitigate these risks and automation was identified as the way forward, nearly two years ago. We evaluated various automation tools in the market. It was critical that we had to identify a strategic tool which would cater to our SAP and non-SAP application landscape. Worksoft Certify came in as a big winner ticking most of our requirements.

View full review »
SK
Executive Director at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

For automation purposes, my company works with multiple open-source tools, like Selenium and Java, along with a few license-based tools, like Worksoft Certify, QuickTest Professional, HP ALM, LoadRunner, IBM Rational Performance Tester, and OpenText Silk Test.

View full review »
Aditya Chakradhar Nanduri - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Test Automation Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

I have been using multiple automation tools, such as Worksoft Certify, UFT, and Tricentis Tosca. Additionally, I have worked on other automation tools, such as Selenium and AccelQ. I provide solutions to the clients based on their requirements. I work on different automation tools.

View full review »
AK
SAP QA Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

We did not have a previous technical solution.

View full review »
DS
QA Manager at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We were using Micro Focus UFT. It became completely unworkable for us. Our end-to-end processes were just too cumbersome for the tool to handle. It got worse and worse to the point where we had to say, "You know what? We have to change tools, this is not helping us." That's when we investigated Worksoft, and we were very pleased with how it worked.

View full review »
EO
Quality Assurance Manager at CHEP

Worksoft Certify was originally purchased for a product. We thought that it was not be used to its full extent, so we ran it through a PoC. Then, we decided that the product could work for us.

View full review »
TT
Application Development Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

I have used UFT in my previous company. Companies that have an SAP application or SAP Fiori prefer Worksoft Certify. For my current client, initially, we were using UFT, but because any non-automation resource can do automation in Worksoft Certify, we brought Worksoft Certify. Now, instead of UFT, we are developing everything in the Worksoft Certify. 

I am also familiar with Selenium. For SAP applications, Worksoft Certify is a very good tool. With UFT and Selenium, you need to create a framework, which is not required with Worksoft Certify. You can just go and develop an automation script. 

So far, I have used Worksoft Certify for the SAP application, the mainframe application, and the web application. For the SAP application, it is working well, but for the web application, instead of Worksoft Certify, it is better to go for Selenium. With the web application, we have the issue of values getting changed when developers make any change in the backend, and we also have a dependency on Worksoft for XF definitions. So, Selenium would be a better solution for web applications.

View full review »
RM
QA Developer II at a university with 10,001+ employees

My organization has been using Certify since 2007. We are committed and very happy with Worksoft. I picked up experience with Worksoft Certify when I joined my organization and leverage my existing automation skills to quickly become effective with the tool. I still use Selenium/Java/Python and was expert-level proficient several market leading enterprise QA automation tools.

View full review »
OH
VP Test and Quality Management at Deutche Telecom

We are forced to have efficiencies every year. We always get less budget and having to do more. So, we had to have some ideas, and our idea in 2017 was to increase automation. We had automation in place beforehand with eCut. However, in the end, we cut rates 10 to 15 percent. With Worksoft Certify, we had this campaign year with company codes up to 80 percent of the automation rate. This is much faster, and we are finding the defects earlier. In the end, you can save money and have better quality.

In three months, we created 1000 scripts with Worksoft. When the three years before with eCut, we did 450 scripts. This is where we saw a difference.

View full review »
RH
Associate Project Manager at Bosch

Compared to our previous solution, Worksoft Certify reduces our test maintenance work by 50%.

View full review »
YJ
Testing Lead at CenterPoint Energy, Inc.

Our upper management wanted to be able to do testing much quicker than what we're actually doing with the manual process. We had to research and find a tool which could provide value for the company.

We had QTP, which wasn't very user-friendly from a coding perspective. There was only a small group of people who could actually use the tool. With Worksoft, we were able to push it out to the business.

View full review »
SB
Principal Software Engineer at a retailer with 201-500 employees

We needed a first step in order to get into DevOps. The first step was being able to automate our smoke tests and regression tests. They are tests that we use to make sure that our SAP environments are viable and our point of sale system. We chose Worksoft because they were the only people who we could find which were capable of automating SAP right out-of-the-box.

We needed a faster feedback loop. We have a third-party who develops our Hybris application for us and wanted to be able to hook into their Git repository, so when they push a new version, it would automatically deploy and run our smoke tests. Then, I can know within ten minutes if it works.

View full review »
CH
Test Automation Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees

I have used Winshuttle as well as DataLoad, which is an open-source and much more simplistic. Winshuttle is used more for something like an RPA function.

Certify has a much deeper bench in terms of what it can actually do. Winshuttle is only functional, to my knowledge, with SAP applications because it's built on the scripting portion of SAP. Its focus isn't for testing, so it's not a good tool for testing. But it is more simplistic in the sense that it looks like a spreadsheet and the result is provided in the last column of what the status bar gave you. It is really designed for one Pcode at a time, in my opinion. Whereas with Certify, you can run a larger-scale test or function or even a larger-scale RPA function, compared to what Winshuttle can support. The complexity involved in that is much harder. It's something of Catch-22, but Certify does enable you to do much more.

View full review »
KA
Global Testing Solution Lead at a consumer goods company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We used to do UFT, which was a pain to maintain. 

View full review »
SD
Senior Analyst at a consumer goods company with 10,001+ employees

We were using UFT before Worksoft and were not happy. UFT was too technical. We wanted to switch over to an easier tool, which was how we switched to Worksoft.

View full review »
GM
SAP Configuration ERP II at a energy/utilities company with 5,001-10,000 employees

We previously did manually testing and used other tools. With Worksoft, we can more see the productivity and benefits that it provides. We can also do more testing, making easier for all the users. 

View full review »
BR
Founder and CEO at www.ITJobZone.biz

We have also used few other tools for our trainings. 

View full review »
GB
Principal Consultant ERP at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

Worksoft Certify has a very simple language. Our clients want to save on cost and ensure everyone who is manual testing knows it takes more effort.

View full review »
DR
Automation Engineer at a pharma/biotech company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We had and still use QuickTest Professional from Micro Focus a little bit, but we were approached back in 2008 about getting into Worksoft Certify.

We went with Worksoft Certify because of its ease of use. You don't have to know a scripting language, like with QuickTest Professional. Also, it has ease of maintenance.

View full review »
KL
IT Automation Specialist at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees

It is not practical to do manual testing anymore due to the volume of it. The amount of data variations is too great to test manually. If we were going to do it manually, we definitely would not have full coverage, where now we can get pretty close to full coverage on our tests.

View full review »
MH
Senior Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

We started with manual testing and then we started the test-automation initiative. We started with our internal corporate tool and then, as I mentioned earlier, we figured out that we could not cover everything with that. At the end of 2015, we started to check the market. We did some PoCs and we decided to go forward with Worksoft Certify.

There were a number of reasons we went with Worksoft Certify. The Worksoft team did a great job. They came to our headquarters and did the PoC, showing that the tool is suitable for our needs. They did another PoC with our operations colleagues who were running the regressions testing in Singapore. And then there were the technical requirements that we had. Worksoft Certify was able to cover all of them, some of which I have mentioned already: Being script-free, being fully integrated in Solution Manager, and being able to script in a modular way. And finally, the integration between our own internal tool and Worksoft Certify was also important.

View full review »
it_user712071 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees

I had familiarity with several tools out there. Turnkey is probably one that you guys have looked at. I've done a lot with the quality center products in the past...Quicktest Pro.

There's other test automation tools out there. I've got a background with test automation and Worksoft...really it was between Worksoft and Turnkey. Worksoft, we just found ,was going to better meet our needs.

View full review »
VS
IT Solutions Analyst at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We used to use QTP, but the ability of Worksoft in the SAP automation space compelled us to make the transition.

View full review »
SP
Associate Project Manager at SOAIS

I previously used Selenium. Comparing these two products, I can say that you need much more IT knowledge to use Selenium. Worksoft Certify is quite easy to debug. 

View full review »
DN
Team Leader at SOAIS

Our customers come up with their requirements, then we come up with a PoC for them. If it works and their happy, they go ahead with it. 

I work with customers for new implementations.

View full review »
it_user700101 - PeerSpot reviewer
Testing and SAP Logistic Senior Business Consultant at a retailer with 5,001-10,000 employees

Previously, we just had manual testings.

View full review »
it_user611934 - PeerSpot reviewer
Worksoft Certify Test Automation Architect, Developer, Trainer at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees

As mentioned, I evaluated Certify against a tool I was using, AutoTester. I was also using WinRunner, Rational Robot, and Seque's Silk at the time. Those names have changed over the years. However, it was immediately evident that none of them could compare even closely with the productivity I could get with Certify. Also, because there is no syntax involved with Certify, process and actions are more like executable documentation, making maintenance much easier.

View full review »
it_user1004163 - PeerSpot reviewer
SR. Business Process Partner, Commercial Operations at GSK at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees

Long ago, we used HPE QuickTest Professional (UFT). The reason that we had to get off it, because it was liked by our business people, was when we went to Hybris in 2015, they didn't work together. So, we jumped ship at that point and went back to manual testing.

While we already had manual test cases, we wanted to move to autotesting because we are doing agile sprints. Our sprints were down somewhere between four to six weeks, depending on what is in that particular sprint and various conditions of trying to get that sprint out the door. We are trying to get down consistently to four weeks. Consequently, we had these test cases, which was up at around 1500 before, and also manual. We needed to get them to run in quicker, shorter periods. That's where autotesting came in.

View full review »
SJ
Automation Lead at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We usually replace tools, the Micro Focus UFT, with Worksoft Certify.

View full review »
JB
Associate Manager Intelligent Testing at Accenture

Worksoft Certify's codeless scripting appeals along with the use of the Capture feature which helps in those initial phases. It also helps to translate the business requirements to the automation team. If there's a separate team, this is a little better too.

There is recognition in the industry that automation capabilities, like Worksoft Certify, create value for companies, as things are only getting harder and larger. Companies are integrating systems to try to align their processes.

View full review »
TL
Senior Solutions Architect at Orasi Software

Prior to this product, we used Micro Focus UFT.

View full review »
it_user676347 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

I have used Tosca Testsuite before moving over to Worksoft Certify. It depends on the client's requirements that we move over to different tools. So, nothing is specific.

View full review »
James JB Croaff - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Quality and Test Engineer at a manufacturing company with 501-1,000 employees

We did not previously use a different solution.

View full review »
it_user701463 - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Test Lead at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Our previous tool couldn’t automate many of the applications we needed to test. Certify also allowed us to increase the number of tests we could maintain with our current team.

View full review »
it_user638808 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager, QA & Testing at a mining and metals company with 10,001+ employees

We didn’t have any other tool in use.

View full review »
it_user181542 - PeerSpot reviewer
SAP Test Manager at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees

There was no established solution and testing was being done manually.

View full review »
SP
Associate Project Manager at SOAIS

We did not regularly use a similar solution prior to Worksoft Certify, although I have worked with others here and there.

View full review »
it_user176928 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We used QTP on BPT framework. We switched because Worksoft Certify gives us a better regression execution & better results for SAP business. Additionally, it ha the Certify Data feature.

View full review »
it_user175548 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead - QA at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

We replaced our existing tool, QTP. Jenkins has script-less automation, and is easy for non-technical people to use.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
Worksoft Certify
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about Worksoft Certify. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.