If you were talking to someone whose organization is considering Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer, what would you say?
How would you rate it and why? Any other tips or advice?
I have to become more familiar with the automation part of CA ARD, and then maybe I'll come to the point of saying that it is a good tool which enables you to take your automation, the testing and development, from deployment and designing of your test case, to pushing them into your testing module - whatever tool you are using; that it is an end-to-end solution. I would rate this solution at six out of ten. I'm working on Tosca, which is also an end-to-end solution for testing, and I see Tosca as a better option to use, except that Tosca is very costly compared to CA ARD. There are other tools as well, like RPA for process automation. CA ARD is lagging in competing with these tools. As an automation tool, it might not be the strongest.
For us, the process of implementing it starts with getting in touch with one of our internal teams and giving a business case for why we are going to use this tool and what the users' rights will be: for example, edit or delete or whatever functionalities we require. They will register us for the solution. Once this is completed, it will trigger an email so we can start using the tool. First, we create the backlog. I work on it from a business analyst perspective and I help the project management team to understand what all the backlogs are that we are maintaining for the upcoming versions. As a business analyst, I note the requirements for the respective backlogs, based on business priorities. Then we pull them into the particular sprints. It will then move to the development team to start looking at each of the user stories. They will divide these user stories into particular, technical tasks. From the testing team point of view, they create, under the same user story, their tasks and start giving their descriptions, including the defects. Once it is completed, we have a UAT done and we update the status of each of these user stories as completed, or in progress, whichever is applicable. Deployment depends on the complexity of the application. We have 25 to 30 people using it in the current project. In my previous organizations, the same tool was used by more than 125 to 130 people. There are different types of users. Business people are also involved, as well as technical testing people, project managers, etc. Different stakeholders are involved. We are implementing it in many projects now. It was not being used as much, in practice, in the organization where I am working, but we are now scaling it up to multiple teams, so that everyone will get the benefits. To scale up to different teams may take another year. There are different service lines in the organization and each of them has to adopt this technology. They are slowly picking it up.
I would advise to use this product, because it is a good way to create models and establish model-based process testing. The optimization technique with integrations is seamless, and a very good tool. It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes. The optimization technique helps in giving us the minimum number of test cases with maximum coverage.
If you are looking to implement model-based testing, reduce the effort required for documenting the requirements, test case creation, automation script generation, maintenance of test cases, and automation scripts, then go for it. It will bring great savings to your organisation.
It is important to ensure that people first understand modeling concepts and the organization's defined modeling best practices before jumping into tool implementation. It is critical to get management support, as for some people test modeling is a very new way of thinking and they would find many reasons to push back. Check CA's videos on modeling available on CA's Youtube channel, before starting to implement the tool itself.