A world without testers, how great would that be? Just type your C# code, build things, deliver things without someone else nagging about bugs and quality.
It would suck. But for different reasons than you would think! We need their thinking before coding starts, not afterwards.

I have worked on software where problems were discovered only after implementation is done or were not discovered at all. To get earlier feedback, we introduced testing techniques that developers and testers could use before and during development, with automated checks and becoming part of CI/CD.

In this demo-driven session, I'll show the practices we introduced and how they help expose risks earlier. Pratices and tools like example mapping, approval testing and Playwright & Aspire wroking in a integrated test. The goal is not to replace testers with automation, but to bring their expertise into software design while giving developers more responsibility for quality.

The technical changes worked, but their adoption was slower than I expected. I'll discuss why introducing a useful testing technique does not mean that people will immediately use it, what got in the way, and what I would do differently. Despite those challenges, the resulting feedback made the software safer to release.

Attendees will leave with practical techniques like example mapping, guidance for choosing where different kinds of tests belong, and lessons for introducing those practices without overestimating their adoption.

This session is intended for C# developers, QA and test-automation engineers, and technical leads who want test expertise to influence software before defects reach production.