Showing posts with label Let's Test. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Let's Test. Show all posts

31 May 2014

Let's Test 2014

Let's Test 2014 is my weirdest conference experience so far. Put that in perspective with my other two being my first ever and my first ever as a speaker and you can imagine it was a special one. So what happened?

My mission
I came to Let's Test with a question: "What is my role" (both in my current job and how I would like it to be in the future) and the mission to gather as much understanding of this as possible.

I left with more than I could ever had imagine and still feel like I've just scratched the surface. I also left with something... else, something I haven't understood yet and with a magnitude I don't even know if I can grasp. If you feel confused, welcome to my world, I have some serious thinking to do.

Welcome!
Imagine this: You step out of your cab and immediately see two people running like their lives depended on it just to hug you. And we're not talking about a soldier coming back from a war zone, we're talking about a test conference! That's how it all started. I got a jumping hug from Meike Mertsch and a two minute hug from Helena Jeret-Mäe, can't ask for a better welcome!

Talking, testing challenge, some beer, dinner, another more large scale testing challenge, more talking... You wanna know one reason why Let's Test rocks? During the testing challenge in the evening some of the most well known names in the business was mixed up with newcomers and anyone in between. The result was beautiful and I can now say I know, from own experience, that for instance Rob Sabourin is a great test lead and Jon Bach is an excellent tester.

Ohh, by the way, what's not to love about someone immediately putting a testing challenge in your hands as soon as they've introduced themselves? That's Kristjan Uba, we'll come back to him but the short story from day one was he instantly made an impression.

Key lessons
  • Peers are invaluable! Peers are invaluable!
  • Twitter builds connections that can often be transferred into "real life" connections. So testers, get a Twitter account!
  • Seeing into the minds of some of the brightest and/or most well known testers in the industry was exciting.
Workshop day
The first day started with an interesting keynote by Tim Lister. It was basically his life story in the software business and lessons he had picked up along the way. It all came together as a beautiful experience report that provided just as much inspiration as it provided actual "content".

Key Lessons (Tim)
  • Be around people ahead of you.
  • Beautiful mindset from Harlan Mills: "If I get a compiler error I go: why did I get a compiler error". Illustrates the need to not just accept mistakes/problems but to learn as much as possible from them.
  • Life is short, stop waiting and just go out and make your own career!
  • Having fun and staying curios are key driving forces and should be treated as such.
  • Right and wrong is for kids, we're grown ups (see the full spectrum of possibilities).
Next up was Rob Sabourin's tutorial. That one just felt a bit too much of a lecture for my style (have quite a bit of useful notes from it though so not saying it was bad, just that I personally was looking for more interaction) so in the afternoon I moved (after getting an okey from the organizers) to Steve Smith's second workshop; "Managing your personal board of directors". I'm glad I did as this workshop turned out to be one of the highlights during the conference!

Key lessons (Rob)
  • Domain expert != Tester, we need to understand the skills involved in being a tester.
  • Decision tables are useful both to help you understand something as well as to spawn testing ideas. Can help you discover combinations of conditions and actions not thought of.
  • 30 years of experience as a tester does not mean 30 years of learning test
  • "Is this the problem?", repeat, repeat, repeat.
  • If a session just happens to not fit you, leave and go for something else!
Steve Smith's workshop had a simple setup: We started out identifying various "directors" influencing us (e.g. Chief Financials Officer advising you to save money/make more money). After that, one of us volunteered being the star (Kristjan Uba) and the rest of us played his board of directors. I ended up being "Chief Family Officer", a perfect fit I would say. Finally, after each of us had had the opportunity to ask a wide array of questions regarding our roles, we started a board of directors meeting. The meeting agenda was to solve three challenges/questions/dilemmas Kristjan was facing. It was fun (as in "laughing hysterically" fun) and, much thanks to an awesome job by the Mind Bender (Lars Sjödahl), the meeting really felt like something coming straight out of a head. I also wanna thank Kristjan for volunteering, he did a phenomenal job as "the star" in a rather exposed position.

Key Lessons (Steve)
  • How does your personal "board of directors" look? Which directors have the most power? Which are the loudest/most quiet?
  • Tim Lister talked about the value of peers, Steve Smith made something cool happen between peers and every moment of the conference proved the value of peers. So, like a wise man wrote just one chapter ago: Peers are invaluable!
  • Good experiential workshops are sooo powerful! (at least for me)
  • The more fun I have the better I seem to learn/remember.
Steve Smith's keynote
A 150 people experiential workshop as a keynote is just as awesome as it sounds. The mission was simple, almost to a degree of silly: You are 12 people, get as many of these to simultaneously stand, for 15 seconds, on a piece of paper placed on the floor. A judge will count your score and make sure you don't cheat. You get one point for each member and the ones that don't make it will become observers. These observers aren't allowed to interact with the rest in any way for the rest of the exercise. The exercise went on for three cycles and each time the paper was folded in half. Silly right?

Well, who is forced to become an observer? Who decides this? Who's ideas are considered? How much risk are you willing to accept and who decides that? What rules can be broken, what happens if you do, who will (try to) break them and who will support/reject this? How do people react when their ideas are rejected? How much will you think about your current context (members) and how much is generic solutions? Do points really matter and will anyone question this? Will you manage to be as creative as you usually are, under time pressure? What role will you take within the group? What happens when people with "key roles" become observers?

Silly changed to mind-boggling! I ended the second day taking a long walk with Helena Jeret-Mäe spending much of that talking about how I had taken more of a leadership role in my group (or at least I felt like that) and how I in this role had lost much of my usual strengths as creative rule challenger and went into "point tunnel vision". The beauty of experiencing this in the simple exercise was I could much more clearly see the outcome and what had lead to it as very little distracted me. Thank you Steve! Thank you Helena! Thank you team!

The final debrief also helped adding to the experience and hey, as part of the debrief I've now given a keynote at Let's Test.

Panda Panda!
I've never (I think) heard anyone say a single bad word about Pradeep Soundararajan. Instead everyone seems to treat him with huge respect, so it was interesting to finally attend one of his sessions. He did not disappoint! In the session he shared the story and vision behind his company Moolya. It was an hour of inspiration, passion, admiration and self-doubt if I really do the most valuable work I can for my current company. The basic message, as I interpreted it, was: "It's all about business value and we must understand the business problems to be useful". Just like Steve's keynote, this one left me with a ton of material that will require massive post-processing before I can fully understand it. Short version: Great session and Pradeep really lived up to his reputation! Panda Panda!

Carsten
I feel a bit guilty cause I needed the second day workshop basically to zone out and reflect on what Steve and Pradeep had helped me discover but not yet understand. The 2,5 hours of sleep I had the night before might have had an impact as well. But one image that stuck with me from Carsten's workhop was how much more clear a problem, and it's solutions, became when observing a group role play the problem compared to only have it on paper or, worse, in my head.

Martin Hynie and Christin Wiedemann
During CAST 2013 Martin said he wanted to speak at a conference and I told him I thought he would make a terrific presenter. He did! Well, both he and Christin did to be precise. I wasn't thrilled about the topic but went partly thanks to a rather weak lineup seen from what I was interested in: I did not regret my choice! For me this session was not so much about the presented content as it was a perfect demonstration of passion, creativity, curiosity and a willingness to explore/experiment, not to mention awesome stuff to use when I present myself (a slide deck made up by selfies, awesome!). Inspired to say the least!

Basic outline: Over a few beers the value of games as a means to train testers came up. No one could provide any real evidence for their claims that it did improve e.g. relevant cognitive skills. Due to this Martin and Christin not only went out to look at any existing data but they gathered a group of people to experiment with (including a "unicorn"; a 25-28 years old tester who had basically no experience of video games or board games), got in contact with a university and together with scientists they conducted cognitive experiments during which brain scans were made (Martin apparently has a big brain). All and all, scientists seemed to wanna keep doing these experiments and they now have at least some indications (even though the sample group was way too small) that testing games do improve relevant cognitive skills for testers. But don't care about the outcome, focus on what Martin and Christin did just because they couldn't find enough proof! Testers everywhere, take note and be inspired!

Lightning talks
I sent an email to Johan Jonasson before the conference asking if there would be any lightning talks, as I had one ready. The answer was: "Great idea, would you mind facilitating them?". I've never facilitated anything and knowing my track record when it comes to being patient and shutting up this couldn't turn into anything but a disaster. Well, it didn't, actually it went pretty good (I think) and it was a lot of fun. Also, in case you think facilitating seems trivial, it's not! I can't even imagine the difficulty level of facilitating e.g. a controversial talk with tons of arguing. I already had great respect for facilitators like Paul Holland, Ilari and Richard Robinson but holy cow, they rock!

So takeaways from the actual talks? Nah, I was way too focused (read nervous) to remember anything. But I did have a ton of fun and got some valuable experience!

Uncertainty workshop
Day three's workshops were crazy hard to choose between (I wanted to go to all of them). In the end I opted for Fiona Charles, much thanks to a quick chat I had with her the evening before. It was an interesting workshop and an interesting group to work in (a factory schooler made it even more interesting and sparked my first of two pretty tense debates during Let's Test). Uncertainty is one of those things I've learned to embrace and I actually do much of my best work when the plan is long gone and chaos is upon me (the flip side being I create chaos more often as I suck at following a plan). So my biggest takeaways were ways to communicate uncertainty not to mention I need to actually communicate it at some point. Some new tools but main takeaway was a started thought process.

The gem!
When looking at the program, one session stood out: Quality Leader - The changing role of a software tester. This aligned perfectly with my mission (figuring out my role). I had previously just quickly shook hands with Anna Royzman so I didn't know much about her but I was in for a treat. The actual session was great, not exceptional, but definitely great and it addressed many of my thoughts. What made the session awesome thought was Anna and a guy from Ukraine...

I think many from the session perceived Andrii as a clown. He did some pretty bold comments about testers' usefulness as well as not caring to use K-cards. After the session he stayed and a debate started between the three of us, a debate that addressed a ton of things related to my question. First of all, Andrii was a really smart man! He, just like me, was trying to figure out his role and we debated for almost 2 hours meaning I have nothing to report from Jon Bach's closing keynote. It started out as mostly a 2 on 1 with me and Anna against him. After a while it turned into more of a "free for all" where we slowly reached some kind of consensus.

I won't bore you with all the details but short version is: "Is (software) tester really a good name for the role many of us claim to have based on what goes into a pretty common view of what testing is within the software business context?". The outcome for me was something like "every person is a bit of everything, the title mostly reflects what we specialize in and/or do the most, this still might not make software tester the best title for many of us if we want to avoid confusion or limiting our ability to act but tester sure describes much of what we do even though tester and software tester are most often perceived as equal in our business". Well, I wish that discussion was recorded but I'll have to rely on my memory cause I was way to worked up to take any notes.

So thank you Andrii and Anna! You're a brave man Andrii and I very much respect that and you're a brilliant quality leader Anna!

Key Lessons (safety language somewhat off)
  • Be careful about speaking degrading about developers, many of us do from time to time (not excluding myself as somewhat seen below) and that's just not helping us.
  • We aren't set roles, we each create a unique, constantly changing role, based on our skills, ambition and current company need but often call them something generic for simplicity, don't be fooled by this though.
  • The landscape is shifting and more adopt ways of working where the "traditional tester" is harder to fit.
  • Don't tell people (like developers, product owners etc.) they test cause it'll freak them out!
  • Your job is not to think about quality, your job is to make everyone think about quality.
  • What will make users say "wow!" about your product? How can you test for that?
Barefoot
Day one I was approached by Ilari asking me why I wore shoes (just a regular day at Let's Test). I gave him a couple of reasons to which he gave valid counter arguments. All and all I promised to try walking barefoot day two, I did and it worked great. I often have sore feet in the evening of a conference day and well, barefoot solved that issue. Was actually comfortable outside as well (not counting some of the gravel) so I've not put on my shoes again since day 2 despite my girlfriend threatening to never walk close to me outside. That doesn't mean I will not put on a pair of shoes soon but you'll probably find me barefoot again during future conferences. Unexpected but very much appreciated experience.

Hugs and games
Someone said to me after Let's Test last year, the conference almost seems "unprofessional". What he was talking about was all the hugging, playing games, open sponsor bar etc. To me this is what takes Let's Test to the next level! Like Klas Hallberg so cleverly puts it: Having fun is not unprofessional but doing something in a boring way when the same thing can be achieved just as efficiently in a fun way, that is unprofessional (makes more sense in Swedish and Klas is probably not the first to say this but he's my source). And like I said before, I seem to learn better when I laugh and have fun which happens a lot during Let's Test.

People
Some, to me, new testers that left an impression:

Kristjan Uba - He's smart, dedicated and creative! After hearing Helena talk highly of him I had quite high expectations and he delivered! Immediately after shaking hands he handed me a testing challenge, he handled the star role in Steve's workshop beautifully and in almost any discussion he delivered snappy, insightful answers. Oh, by the way, as CFO I just wanna let you know Kristjan, you'll make a hell of a dad!

Graham Maxfield - This guy is smart and creative (good combo once again). He had all sorts of smart ideas during Steve Smith's keynote (that we foolishly rejected) and provided a lot of good feedback during other workshops and sessions we both attended.

Anna Royzman - After giving a great presentation she handled/facilitated her, my and Andrii's discussion perfectly and added many valuable points to it. This is a name I will look for in future conference programs and I look forward to speaking to her again!

... There are more people who deserves a mention but let's just say, a lot of you made an impression!

Summary
Greatest moment during this adventure? Getting back home hugging my kids. Boring answer but couldn't be more true. Second best moment; the two welcoming hugs and anything related to seeing my super peer Helena in person again for the first time since last Let's Test. Third best moment; when the lessons from Steve Smith's keynote just suddenly started to sink in.

Left to do? Massive post-processing! That "something" is still out of reach and there's more to many of the experiences I had throughout the conference that I just haven't figured out yet.

More substantial stuff to do? Put what I want my current and future role to look like on paper and try using decision tables on the business rules we have in the product I'm currently testing to find potential gaps/missed tests.

See you all soon (I hope) and thank you!

28 May 2013

Exploring what I know to learn something new

After reading an article tweeted by Tobbe Ryber I made an interesting connection...

Wouldn't a profile similar to what was described in the article be possible to create using Louise Perold's Test Planner from Let's Test?

So I quickly tried it ending up with the following columns:

Problem: What problems would I be able to solve for a company?
How: How do I act/what do I do to solve the problems I say I can solve?
Success: How would my work benefit the company? What will come of it?
Failure: How do I usually screw up / fail to meet expectations (incl my own)?
Data: What usually varies between companies I've worked for (how has that changed my success/usefulness)
Issues: What do I typically need from the company to function well?

When doing this I suddenly thought: Maybe the same approach could be useful when planning my CAST presentation? Or maybe when talking about the way forward with the product I test? Or maybe my travel to Madison? Or...

Well, I've just spent a moment thinking about this so it might be crap but I still find it interesting that something I learned specifically for testing seems to be useful in so many other contexts.

Thank you Louise for providing me with an interesting tool that seems to be useful in very many cases! (give me a day and the number of ways to use it will have grown substantially... I think .)

So how can I apply what Ilari, Huib, Jean-Paul, James, Johanna, Leo, Griffin, John, Steve, Zeger and Scott talked about in something else but testing? I'm inspired to figure that out next...

And how can you use what you learned in other ways than described/intended by the presenters? And what can you learn from doing that?

... Even more interesting: What, currently not test related, have you learned that could help you improve your testing?

Good luck exploring what you already know to learn something new!

23 May 2013

Let's Test - a summary


Sunday evening
  • You are never alone (if you don't want to)! Just sit down at a random table or start talking to someone you've never met before. If you don't dare doing that, just stand still and someone will approach you. The amount of people I got to meet in three days blew my mind! Thank you everyone!
  • The energy also struck me. Every discussion had a wonderful flow; people cared, people was thinking and people was curios.
  • Putting personalities and, sometimes, faces on people from Twitter was a cool thing. 
Keynote: James Bach, How do I know I'm Context-Driven?
  • We need to identify and clear shallow agreements. Questions are a great tool for this.
  • Context-Driven can mean a Paradigm, a Community and an Approach. Don't confuse the three, for instance, if your paradigm is Context-Driven you can't just jump in and out, you are Context-Driven (by choice) on the other hand, the community is something where you to some degree be part of while still being part of another community or having another paradigm.
  • Greeters and Guides are the people that introduce new people to Context-Driven Testing and help them and others grow inside the community. These people are key to making the community thrive.
Tutorial: Ilari Henrik Aegerter, The Challenges of Brilliant Observations...
  • People take their decisions based on what they observe, or rather perceive they observe. This makes observational skills a key in most aspects of life. In testing they are our bread and butter in finding/providing important information.
  • There are so many things biasing our observations (old models, language, instructions/provided information, distractions and a whole lot of other things) and we can't do much about many of them per se. However, knowledge and critical thinking can help us be aware and chose different approaches to help work around them.
  • When communicating observations it's important to avoid ambiguity when possible: this is (what is "this"?), preferred (by who?), few (in comparison to what? how many?).
Comments:
I love how Ilari approaches questions. He has an amazing ability to just suck up the question, think, ask for additional information and form a well constructed answer in seconds, through all this he always keeps his calm. I have a lot to learn from this guy! (especially as someone opening my mouth before even starting to think ,)

I also like how Ilari left us with a lot of tools but not much instructions on how to use them. I've already taken on the challenge of finding ways to incorporate this new knowledge in my daily work.

Tutorial: Huib Schoots and Jean-Paul Varwijk, Thinking and Working Visually
  • Give visualization a chance! You don't have to be an artist to sketch, make mind maps or add illustrations, but you do have to actually try!
  • Cover your walls with sketches, diagrams, illustrations and other visual representations of you work.
  • Get a magic marker (Edding 345, grey marker, edding.com, EAN: 4 004764 841592) and even your bad images will start to look cool. 
This is what you should aim for in a tutorial. Left is before, right is after, can we agree that this is a significant improvement? (even without the magic marker by the way). With better light and some quick editing these visualizations could also be used in future blog posts, cool bonus!

Monday evening: Takeaways from discussions
  • Every time I do even the slightest attempt to use the Socratic method I and, as it seems, others learn something. Driving a discussion using questions is a rewarding and useful skill!
  • A role is not the same as responsibilities or skills.
  • If everything is considered priority one, nothing becomes priority one.
Keynote: Johanna Rothman, Kick-Ass Manager
  • Where do you want to go, what career paths matters to you?
  • To the business, bugs are not an interesting problem, but the complications of them are!
  • What is relevant changes over time, you might one day wake up and realize perceived quality is suddenly a much more important issue than functionality and rapid shipping (or in any other order).
Comments:
For most summaries I've tried mixing what the presenter seemed to focus on and what I took away. For this keynote it's only what mattered to me cause I had three things that really did matter. I urge you to check out this keynote yourself when/if it becomes available! (in case you weren't there)
Session: Huib Schoots, Future Roles and Trends in Testing
I could list the things discussed (or well, actually I couldn't since I didn't write much of it down) but the list, as Huib said, is not what's relevant. Instead, start thinking about what might happen, how that affects your work and prepare yourself for what's relevant to you. It's a huge topic and there are obviously no known answers but you better be ready cause the future will happen no matter what you want.

Session: Leo Hepis, Linguistics, How to Keep a Dialog Constructive
  • Volunteer! You might feel uncomfortable being put in the spotlight but look at it as an amplifier for learning. Also, if you're one of those who want to build a brand I image this is a good thing to do cause I've not lowered my respect for any of the volunteers in any of the sessions I've attended but I've sure found a couple of people who've earned my respect by doing it (and sometimes you get away with cool stuff, right Kristoffer? .)
  • Keeping a discussion cooperative is key if you want to effectively transfer information.
  • At least for me, it's easy to provide an answer before I'm sure of what answer I really should provide.
Session: Griffin Jones, What is Good Evidence?
  • Griffin had a lovely list of attributes to check for in a piece of evidence, check out his slides!
  • There's a difference between what we actually did and what we intended to do (hello "passed" test case, I have no idea what actually made you "pass").
  • Discouraging feedback, like leaving out confusing/unexplained/contradictory details/data/observations or other things that might conflict with your verdict, hinders the possibility to critically analyze a piece of evidence, which hurts the validity of your evidence.
Session: Louise Perrold, The Test Planner
  • Start with Problems: Which are the business problems we try to solve with our product?
  • Make additional columns for each of the things below and populate them as well with items:
    Success, what represents good
    Failure, in what ways can the product fail, what consequences may occur
    How, how can we test this product (logistics and techniques)
    Data, what variables do we have
    Issues, what do we need, to be able to test
  • Use the items from each column to inspire/spawn new items in the same or other columns. Repeat until satisfied.
Comments:
Probably the most "loosen up" (laughing, smiling, chatting, casual) session I went to, which was a great thing. Don't know if it's a coincidence / wishful thought but I feel like I remember more from this one than most others.

Bug hunters will notice "Data" seems a bit out of place... answer is quick and dirty graphics editing on a really not professional level.

Tuesday evening: Test Lab
  • A great test leader can really make a difference! Less control more empowerment (e.g. coaching, empathy, support, freedom) is one of the keys to that for me.
  • It's really fun to sit in a tight group and just work together focused to find relevant product information (feel free to call it bugs in this specific case). By the way, I'm at a company where we already do that and it's just as fun "at home"!
  • It's hard to explain a bug in purely text, images and/or videos are often great compliments.
Session: John Stevenson, Information Overload and Bad Decisions
  • S L O W   D O W N !
  • For instance requirement documents can prime/anchor you to certain solutions limiting your ability to see important options. Be aware of this.
  • We often make quick judgements instead of think. We need to be aware of this and apply critical thinking to avoid missing key observations.
Session: Steve Smith, Debugging Human Interactions
  • There is a relationship between low self esteem and very active defense reactions.
  • We don't receive sensory input (like seeing, hearing etc.) in an objective way. Reactions to certain sensory input can for instance make us shut down/forget/ignore other sensory input.
  • Being aware of how sensory input is "used" (forming one or more meanings of the input, feelings, feelings about having these feelings, prepare defense mechanisms and setting rules for commenting) can help understanding your or someone else's reaction.

Session: Zeger Van Hese, Testing In The Age of Distraction - The Importance of (de)Focus
  • Y O U   D O N ' T   N E E D   T O   R E S P O N D !
  • Receptive distractions reloads/refreshes us. Examples: taking a walk or having a coffee
    Deceptive distraction drains us. Examples: meetings or emails
  • Observe when you start to procrastinate and see if you can find certain patters/scenarios.
Comments:
Zeger commented that flow, in the original description, "suspends critical abilities", which might be a bad thing for testers. My interpretation is that it rather inhibits what may distract you from proceeding and in a regular creative activity that thing is criticism but in testing, criticism is more or less the "creative activity" itself. I would instead interpret flow, in the context of for instance exploratory testing, to inhibit the risk of you rejecting a critical observation. But that's just a thought that popped up as I reread my notes. Feel free to comment or question (directed to anyone, not specifically to Zeger).

Keynote: Scott Barber, Business Value in Testing
  • Testing as an isolated activity has no value... but the resulting information is worth something.
  • Sometimes the needs of the Business overrides the needs of the Users (e.g. a product must get out on the market to not miss a marketing window).
  • It's important for testers to learn basic business lingo to improve our ability to communicate information. Hopefully that can also motivate business people to learn basic testing lingo as well.

Reoccurring themes throughout many of the conversations and presentations I attended
  • We need to stop multitasking!
  • Beware of various kinds of bias that limits what/how we observe.
  • People, people, people! Like it or not, our business is all about people!
  • Keep things simple! E.g. leave out redundant/irrelevant information.
  • We need to understand the business implications of what we do.
Some comments I liked
Notice! None of these are exact quotes (I suck at noting down exact quotes), I hope I haven't messed up the original meaning due to this, please correct me if that's the case!

Great enough instead of good enough or perfect
/who said this, Martin? Leo? Maria? Was after Steve Smith's session.

Jerry Weinberg is Yoda
/James Bach, keynote, completely taken out of context by the way

It's all about following your energy
/Huib Schoots, lunch

There's no reason not everyone can become awesome
Johanna Rothman, keynote

A few people that really made an impression on me
I started making this list but soon realized I had at least 20 people I wanted to add and it just became silly. But, stubborn as I am, I want to highlight three:

Richard Robinson
For a Miago Do belt Rich got the challenge to form and lead a test team with the mission to test XBMC for roughly an hour and a half and finally debrief the results. I was fortunate enough to be part of this team cause the experience itself was awesome and I think Rich did a kick ass job! Whenever I'm doing something test leader:ish he'll be my role model! (read the first item in the Test Lab summary further up for some reasons).

Huib Schoots
Pure energy on two feet and with a well earned Buccaneer cap on his head. Interesting, helpful and intelligent. His (and Jean-Paul's) visualization tutorial also had an instant effect on my notes which was awesome! Next mission, inspired by the mentioned tutorial and other discussions, is to cover the office with various visualizations of our product.

Johanna Rothman
Apart from delivering a keynote that helped me realize/explain certain things (see summary further up) I really enjoyed just speaking to her. Apart from curiosity, a willingness (or even urge) and ability to help, she seems to deeply care about everyone she's speaks to. Amazing person, I truly value what she taught me during meals and through her keynote! Yeah, and it's hard not to mention how she stands up for what she believes (I think everyone attending Let's Test knows what I mean)

A lot of other people deserves more than a short mention, like Helena, Steve, Jari, Ilari, Jesper, Martin, Kristoffer... but the line has to be drawn somewhere. But let me just say: Thanks to all of you for the amazing discussions, exercises and lectures I've had during my last three days! I deeply appreciate every single one of them!

Wrap up: The Taxi Driver
In the taxi back to the train station I spoke to the taxi driver. I think his story well summarizes what people on Let's Test was all about.

Short version is he had been a hairdresser for 15 years but lost his energy. So he changed career and started driving a cab. What he loved about it was feeling free and the human interactions, he also liked how his taxi company's ethics resonated with his own. When listening to him my impression was he loved his job and that he truly cared about being the best taxi driver he could ever be. Even though leaving Let's Test I was smiling the whole way, that guy would had fitted perfectly at Let's Test.