I recently encountered an interested case: we are asked to evaluate a system through user acceptance testing (UAT). I looked at the testing, it is essentially a set of functional tests.
I wonder what’s the difference between functional tests and UAT, and dig out the following link.
According most posts on that thread, the differences between UAT and functional testing are just focus and scope, that is, if functional testing is performed by users for the sake of user, then it’s UAT.
While there is nothing wrong for functional testing including in UAT, however, if UAT only contains functional testing, it is possible that users tick all the box, but still avoid to use the system. For example, if the system requires a complex authentication mechanism to login, while with alternative you don’t have to. Even the system does everything else correctly it was designed, you would most likely to use the alternatives instead of the system.
So stop wondering why your system pass UAT but people deflect to alternatives. Please at lease asks following:
- Do you need to use this system?
- Do you enjoy using this system? If not, why?
If you feel like it, you may even ask
3. Will you use this system.
You may get interesting results combining the answers of all there question.