Are we asking the right question?

I'm part way through reading Freakonomics by Steven D Levitt & Stephen J Dubner (Gr8 read just quitely!). In the opening "economics is a science with excellent tools for gaining answers but a serious shortage of interesting questions..." and this starting me wondering are we asking the right questions in software testing? I mean every day I get asked how's our defect count, how close are we to finishing testing, how many tests have you run, how many are left, were is the test report. All of these are valid but really uninteresting questions (I think!) rather blah and binary, and really do the answers to these questions really tell us much? There's a line in one of the Disney movies (Shrek I think) in which one of the characters supporting characters said "blah, blah blah" and then the main character said "yes he's talking, but is he saying anything?" Which is kind of the way I feel about answering the daily questions. I give the answers, but without understanding the meaning behind the numbers or tends am I really saying anything? Shouldn't we be being asked about business processes or risks or impact on revenue? These are much more interesting but I think based on the freakonomics outlook something like ... help help me to find an interesting question!  

more to come...

Are we testing the right things?

Recently on a plane back from Adelaide I read an article in the QANTAS in-flight magazine the Australian Way (as you do!) the article was written through the eyes of a traveller who was visiting somewhere in either Canada or North America. The bits of the article I found most thought provoking was the quotes of the tour guide who said something like 'focus on what you can see, stop and admire all that is around you; don't lament the that you didn't see a bear, be thankful you have seen over 100 different types of plants and animals.' The guide went on to say 'all too often tourists visit these parts and rush from place to place to see this and that, taking only photos of things, not creating a memory by experiencing being there'. This made perfect sense too me the phase "Stop and smell the roses" came to mind. By chance tonight I saw the tagline of another article Look Beyond the Lens on the Sydney Morning Herald's website and after only reading the tagline I pondered.... As testers, in testing do we sometimes focus too much on proving that a requirements have been implemented or that defects have been found as a result of our efforts - to prove we were there? Do we focus on finding the bear in the woods because it's big, scary and easy to see or not see, all the while missing the wondrous smaller wildlife, flowers and trees that are necessary parts of the ecosystem for the bear to survive or equally perish?

My initial thoughts were along the lines of do we focus too much on finding bugs and satisfying requirements (taking pictures - see it is there, I saw it) only to forsake to the things that our users actually need from the system to do there job or improve their efficiencies? And if this is the case, then how do we change our plans to allow us to stop for a while and just "be there"...  Somehow I think the need to take pictures and wiz off to the next location is a result of time constrains and a desire to see as much as possible in a given period of time. Equally in testing, time or lack of time is a huge factor. But it is time that maybe the ultimate measure for a picture only lasts for as long as the media is around and often fades over time (remember when they used to print pictures!) while a memory can live forever being pasted from one generation to another! It's time to choose which we value more, pictures or memories...