Since its inception, IT has been about automating business processes. However, it has been slow to apply that concept to itself.
In part, at least, this is because IT departments are primarily tasked with serving the business; improving their own performance so that they can better serve the business is all too often regarded as secondary and budget is often not forthcoming for this purpose. However, this is a short sighted view: the cost to the business of manual software testing results in more defects than there should be, detected later than they should be, and costing more to rectify than they should. That is, always supposing that you don't go ahead and release the software in a defect-laden state, in which case it won't just cost you more but way, way more than it should.
Bloor Research believes—and this is discussed in detail in our Spotlight paper "Automating test case generation"—that, while automating test case generation isn't sufficient on its own to ensure fully functional, accurate application development, it is necessary. That without tying test cases to requirements, testing will continue to be ad hoc, time consuming, inefficient and wasteful. In this paper we compare and examine the different vendor products that are available in the market for this purpose.