How to up your testing game with a platform approach

A recent blog post, A Lack of Standard Testing Terms Hurts Us All, highlights a common frustration in the software testing world: there’s no universally agreed-upon terminology.

Depending on where you work, a “test case” might refer to a broad scenario, a detailed step-by-step guide, or something else entirely. The same confusion applies to terms like “test execution”, and “defect”—creating unnecessary friction and miscommunication.

But the lack of standard terminology isn’t the root problem—it’s a symptom of a much bigger issue: testing itself is fragmented across organizations, industries, and teams.

Different companies—and even different departments—approach testing in their own way, using different processes, methodologies, and tools. In this blog we’re discussing how a structured, platform-driven approach could bring some consistency to how we handle testing, and the benefits that could bring.

Testing is suffering from fragmentation

Every organization has its own way of managing testing: some use spreadsheets, others rely on homegrown tools, while some operate with inconsistent manual tracking.

Even within organizations, different teams might define and execute testing in completely different ways.

The example from Callum’s blog is a great example – an hour spent debating the difference between a ‘risk’ and an ‘issue’, with nothing to show for it.

Unlike industries with well-defined frameworks (e.g., ITIL for IT service management or GAAP for accounting), testing remains highly variable, making it harder for professionals to track progress, improve skills, and demonstrate value to employers.

Certifications exist, including ISTQB, but they don’t fully address the issue. They don’t ensure that testers work within structured, consistent environments across organizations.

This inconsistency slows projects down, creates miscommunication, and makes it harder for testing to be taken seriously.

The hidden cost of inconsistencies in testing

In many industries, professionals have clear benchmarks to measure their performance. A financial analyst knows what good financial reporting looks like. A project manager can compare their processes against industry standards like PRINCE2 or Agile frameworks.

But for software testers, the lack of standardization makes it harder to assess performance—both at an organizational and individual level.

For organizations: Without an industry-wide standard, how do you know if your testing processes are effective? Are you ahead of the curve or lagging behind? With no common framework to compare against, it’s difficult to identify strengths, weaknesses, or areas for improvement.

For individuals: Testers looking to develop their careers don’t have clear benchmarks to measure their progress. What does “good” look like for a tester at a mid-level or senior position? How do your skills stack up against industry best practices when it’s so hard to compare activities and efforts across organizations?

Testing tools and methodologies vary wildly across teams and organizations. One company may use a structured test management platform, while another relies on homegrown scripts, spreadsheets, or even email chains.

This lack of consistency makes it difficult for both individuals and organizations to improve their testing practices in a structured way—which is why the industry needs a better approach.

A platform approach: bringing structure to testing

A test management platform provides an organized, repeatable framework for testing that standardizes how test cases, test execution, and reporting are structured.

Instead of relying on individual habits or undocumented tribal knowledge, a platform ensures that everyone follows a consistent approach, reducing confusion and inefficiency.

Key benefits of a platform-driven approach:

• Standardized workflows: Ensuring every test cycle follows best practices.

• Clear, shared definitions: So teams don’t waste time arguing over what “test coverage” actually means.

• Consistent reporting: Making it easier to track progress and prove the value of testing.

By using a structured, centralized testing platform, organizations can ensure that their teams aren’t just following good testing practices internally but are aligning with industry-wide best practices.

More than just standardization – the professionalization of testing

Of course, our hope is that more and more organizations come to use the Original Software platform. And as they do, it’s possible that we won’t just help improve testing quality and efficiency—we could also elevate the professionalization of software testing.

With a standardized toolset and set of processes to follow, software testing experts could more effectively evaluate their own efforts alongside others, whether that’s to improve the efforts of their employer or with an eye on their own professional growth. On top of that, a system that allows you to quantify the effort involved in software testing, the bugs uncovered, and how those things change over time will allow testing functions to demonstrate their value to the organization. If you can achieve that, you may be able to unlock more budget for your testing team, and elevate the discussion about software testing to a higher level where you can ensure that the quality of the software you release to users and customers is raised for good.

From chaos to clarity

Maybe we’re getting ahead of ourselves here. But whether you share our vision for a standardized and professionalized software testing discipline, it’s hard to argue against the value of a platform approach to testing.

If you’d like to learn more about how our platform can help you raise your testing game, click below to explore what it can do for you.