Testing Peers

We've all had ideas that we thought were brilliant, only to be met with silence, indifference or a room full of questions we weren't quite ready to answer. So how do we get people on board with our ideas, and do we always need to?
In this episode, Chris, Ben, Rachel and Russell explore the challenges of getting buy-in, sparked by Ben's own experiences of sharing ideas before they're fully formed. What starts as a conversation about cutting through the noise develops into a discussion about influence, experimentation, collaboration and knowing when to let an idea go.
Along the way, we discuss:
Finding the signal in the noise: Sharing ideas, testing their value and recognising which ones deserve more attention.
Knowing your audience: Understanding what matters to others, choosing the right moment and framing ideas in ways that resonate.
Experimentation over commitment: How small, reversible experiments can make it easier for people to embrace change.
Sharing ownership: Creating opportunities for others to contribute ideas and shape solutions, rather than always providing the answers.
Making space for different voices: The value of asynchronous communication, psychological safety and giving people time to think.
Knowing when to persist or pause: Why some ideas need a different approach, while others might benefit from a little time on the shelf.
The cost of getting it wrong: How excluding people from decisions can damage trust, even when the intentions are good.
We also explore whether every idea really needs widespread support, how leaders can encourage a culture of experimentation, and why sometimes the best way to get started is simply to give yourself permission to try.
And, in true Testing Peers tradition, we begin with a rather important question about our last meals before the robot overlords take over.
We'd love to hear from you! How do you approach getting buy-in for your ideas? Have you ever had an idea that initially went nowhere, only to succeed later? Or perhaps you've learnt the hard way what happens when people aren't brought along with a decision?
#PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Price of £30.
And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested
Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers)
LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers)
Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/)
Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers)
If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers
Support the show

AI is changing how software is built. More can be generated, changed and shipped faster than before. So where does that leave testing and quality engineering, and what do we bring with us as the way we build software continues to change?
In this episode, Chris, Russell and Tara are joined by Richard Hinton to explore what the AI era might mean for people working in testing and quality. Rather than trying to protect the role we have today, the conversation looks at how our skills can evolve alongside the technology and where a testing mindset becomes particularly valuable when the pace of change increases.
There’s plenty that is new, from non-deterministic systems and AI-generated code to agents reviewing the work of other agents. There’s also plenty that feels remarkably familiar. We still need to understand risk. We still need useful feedback. We still need to challenge assumptions, understand what changed, ask whether everyone actually understood the same thing, and make decisions about when something is good enough.
The conversation explores:
Why speed and scale make critical thinking and fast feedback increasingly important.
What happens when generating software becomes easier than understanding everything we have generated.
The temptation to outsource our thinking alongside the more mundane parts of our work.
Why small changes, experimentation and good engineering practices still matter when AI is doing some of the building.
Accountability when humans and AI are increasingly involved in the same decisions and outputs.
Bias, hallucinations and what happens when AI is trained on imperfect human behaviours, practices and data.
Keeping our own skills sharp enough to question, direct and understand the tools we're using.
How testing and quality roles might evolve towards risk, systems thinking and helping teams make sense of increasing amounts of information.
The importance of connecting intent with outcomes, rather than assuming that faster creation automatically gives us better software.
There’s no call here to stand on the sidelines waiting to say “we told you so”. AI gives us new capabilities, and we are going to experiment, get things wrong, learn and adapt. Testing has plenty to contribute to that process.
Along the way, we also encounter AI reviewing AI, spaghetti monster systems, sunk costs, 99 bugs on the wall, overly agreeable LLMs and the possible need for critical-thinking rehab centres.
The tools are changing. How we apply what we know will need to change with them.

#PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Price of £30.
And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested
Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers)
LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers)
Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/)
Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers)
If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers
Support the show

What brings you joy in testing?
In this episode, Chris, Russell and Tara are joined by Linda van der Vooren to talk about the parts of testing that still make the job worthwhile, even when work itself isn't always particularly joyful.
They explore the satisfaction of making a genuine difference, solving difficult problems, helping others learn and watching ideas take hold beyond the person who introduced them. The conversation also turns to the testing community, finding people to learn from and challenge you, and the wonderfully unexpected knowledge you can accumulate simply by testing different things.
There’s also room for deliberately doing things the awkward way, accessibility, root cause analysis, light bulb moments, learning through play, the potential for AI and automation to remove some of the joy of figuring things out, and why sometimes stepping away from work entirely is exactly what is needed.
Along the way: testing bingo, rubber ducks, friction maxing, saxophones, pub quizzes, the great outdoors, naps and a glass wall erected to protect developers from an overly enthusiastic tester.
What keeps you loving testing?
#PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Price of £30.
And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested
Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers)
LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers)
Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/)
Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers)
If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers
Support the show

What are you known for? Is it what you want to be known for? And how much control do you have over either?
In this episode of the Testing Peers, Chris Armstrong, Russell Craxford, Dan Ashby and Tara Walton explore intellectual territory: the ideas, problems and patterns of thinking we repeatedly return to.
Against a backdrop of AI, changing roles and questions about future relevance, the Peers discuss whether intellectual territory is something we choose, discover or have placed upon us by others.
They explore identity and perception, the opportunities and limitations of becoming known for something, and whether being a generalist makes territory harder to define. They also consider how territory can evolve as careers, interests and contexts change.
And it doesn't require global recognition. Your intellectual territory might simply be what colleagues come to you for, what your team associates with you, or the perspective you consistently bring to a conversation.
Exploring Your Intellectual Territory
Chris introduces seven questions for exploring your own intellectual territory. The fuller prompts are below.
The aim is to uncover something durable: not trendy topics or surface positioning, but the patterns of thinking that are consistently yours.
1. Across your past work, talks, writing and decisions:
What recurring tensions do you return to?
What problems do you seem unable to ignore?
What assumptions do you frequently challenge?
2. Where do you consistently add value?
Do you clarify?
Reframe?
Simplify?
Expose risk?
Connect systems?
Interrogate signals?
Something else?
3. What irritates you professionally?
Vanity metrics?
Superficial optimisation?
Incentive distortion?
Performative confidence?
Something deeper?
Irritation often points to intellectual territory.
4. What do you believe that is both:
True across contexts, and
Uncomfortable enough that not everyone agrees?
5. What is the mechanism behind your thinking?
Do you operate through empiricism?
Through systems thinking?
Through cultural observation?
Through risk framing?
Through interrogation of assumptions?
6. If you stripped away job titles and trends, what lens remains?
7. What capability would organisations strengthen if they deeply adopted your way of thinking?
As you explore them:
Challenge where you generalise. Push yourself to be specific. Avoid buzzwords. Avoid praise. Articulate patterns, not slogans.
The questions aren't intended to produce an immediate answer. There may be a difference between the territory you believe you occupy and the one others place you in. You cannot completely control what sticks, but you can reflect on it, reinforce it or choose to move towards something different.
References and Mentions
The episode references Simon Sinek and Start With Why, Brené Brown's work on vulnerability and leadership, April Dunford and positioning, DORA metrics, Lisa Crispin & Janet Gregory and agile testing, and Dan Ashby's continuous testing/DevOps model.
#PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Price of £30.
The Call for Papers is open until July 31st, 2026: https://testingpeerscon.com/collaboration/
And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested
Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers)
LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers)
Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/)
Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers)
If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers
Support the show

What does testing look like in 2026?
In this episode, Tara Walton, Chris Armstrong, Russell Craxford and Dan Billing reflect on the current state of testing, quality engineering and software delivery in a rapidly changing industry.
From the continued rise of AI and changing organisational priorities to evolving job titles, shifting responsibilities and the importance of context, the conversation explores both the opportunities and challenges facing quality professionals today.
Despite ongoing disruption, many of the themes feel familiar. Communication, critical thinking, collaboration, adaptability and understanding customer value remain at the heart of effective testing. The panel discusses how quality professionals can continue to influence decisions, contribute earlier in the development process and help organisations navigate an increasingly complex technology landscape.
Topics discussed
The impact of AI on software development and testing
Why quality engineering remains about more than automation
Communication, influence and stakeholder engagement
Changing roles and career paths within testing
Legacy systems, modernisation and organisational change
The importance of context, adaptability and human judgement
What the future may hold for testing and quality engineering
#PeersCon27 (March 11th, 2027) is now LIVE Tickets for the event are live for the Early Bird Price of £15 until later in the year.
The Call for Papers is open until July 31st, 2026: https://testingpeerscon.com/collaboration/
And as always, we are looking for sponsors to make this event the success it has been for the last 3 years, get in touch if interested
Twitter (https://twitter.com/testingpeers)
LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/testing-peers)
Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/testingpeers/)
Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TestingPeers)
If you like what we do and are able to, please visit our Patreon to explore how you could support us going forwards: https://www.patreon.com/testingpeers
Support the show