Picture this: A developer is assigned to fix a bug—but can’t reproduce it. Is it an environmental issue? A data discrepancy? Either way, the hunt begins.
You can reproduce the bug, so you jump on a Teams or Zoom call to demonstrate. Now, two people are burning time. Maybe this helps the developer replicate the issue—or maybe not. Perhaps it’s a hardware quirk. Maybe it only happens to the three customers you happened to use.
From the tester’s perspective, the bug is documented as best as possible. From the developer’s side, the fix is achievable—if only the issue could be reproduced. Frustration mounts. And while this back-and-forth plays out, one undeniable reality remains: the testing of Order Entry is on hold.
Meanwhile, the tester moves on to their next assignment, where—surprise!—the same cycle unfolds. Their workload becomes a whirlwind of half-finished tasks, each one teetering between progress and pause.
Here’s the hard truth: manual testing is wildly inefficient, no matter who does it. And when we step into the world of User Acceptance Testing (UAT), the complexity skyrockets.
Business Users vs. UAT—A Match Made in…Well, Not Heaven
UAT is typically handled by business users because they know the requirements best. But testing isn’t their main job, their passion, or their priority—if it was, they’d be testers.
What’s new? Business users don’t like testing, feel it takes them away from their actual work, and—spoiler alert—they’ve never been trained on how to test properly. But that’s fine, right? They only need to run a few scenarios and confirm everything works.
Hold that thought.
Even that assumption is more complicated than it seems. The IS team (likely running the UAT program) needs insights into both successful tests and failures. Without that visibility, how can they confidently say an application is ready to go live?
And then there’s the dreaded moment: a business user stumbles upon a bug.
Will they be as thorough as a QA professional? Will they repeat the test multiple times to document every detail? Will they craft a structured email to flag the issue properly? Not likely. And if a developer can’t reproduce it, will the business user enthusiastically dive into conversations about environment variables, hardware specs, and step-by-step recreations?
Let’s be honest—not a chance.
The Good News? There’s a Smarter Way
We’re not suggesting a complete overhaul of the system (no need to reinvent the wheel). But there is a better approach—one that significantly reduces inefficiencies without requiring a drastic change in process.
The key? Smarter, more effective solutions that streamline testing, minimize back-and-forth, and keep both testers and developers from tearing their hair out. Our platform allows this to happen, fast. With out-of-the-box solutions for your ERP that works across your ENTIRE tech stack.
We think that’s a better way—don’t you?
