There is the tendency in industry to insist, as requirement to testers, to have some specific skills or knowledge. Although that is not a problem, it becomes one when it has a certain priority. There is also a filling for empty space with anything irrelevant. Here is what I mean:

• Job ads and interviewers ask questions about the bug tracker application used like Jira or Bugzilla. Well I find this totally irrelevant. If you know to use the computer, even if you don’t have a testing experience you will get very fast to work with it. There will be the need when aboard on a new team to know maybe how to customize or approach the reporting but it is as important as knowing where the coffee machine is. And reporting a bug is not part of testing. Sure you can save time giving more details, but usually this is done by adapting to the team. If you discussed with the team members and you got familiar with their approach is best to report an issue as soon as possible. Looking too much for details might be not important because the dev guys can determine the issue much more faster. You might be careful for the management overview, or the non-technical people that watch the issues and need to take decision for a bug, or new future people on project who are not familiar with it; but this is not the idea. Its not an issue we should insist on.
• Programming and scripting skills are highly over-asked for testers. Just like any skill that is helpful, scripting being a very important one, should not fill the whole set of a tester activity. You see the testers at Microsoft for example, every one blogs using code, or ads require coders, there are no testers but SDET. And everyone knows the trouble the Windows applications give (blue screen rings a bell?). Too less or too high usage of a skill requirement is bad as too hot or too cold for human body. Again let’s not insist on that.
• Creating test cases is again a popular requirement and a way to do testing. Well creating and executing test cases does not give for example in my view the real impact of a functionality. Everything tends to be flat with test cases especially when your work is measured by this. And lets say you have to create some what is the big deal with this? Most of the time is stupid scenarios that reduce the thinking and motivation of a tester. Its not a big deal also to copy/paste some requirements or invent some simple steps and expected results.
• Testing on Linux is again a good opportunity for untrained hiring managers to mess up the testing skills and replace them with something else. This days a lot of people use Linux and I do as well, but let’s not transform testing in this platform into a show-off display of bash commands or stupid arrogance, or a Windows-Linux stuff or an opportunity to create complex quiz to hire testers. I would hire a good tester on a Linux project even if he didn’t had experience on testing on this platform before but let’s say he used it a couple of times.
• A set of tools and certifications is also a sick requirement for testers because of its percentage in the ads. Most of them are not even relevant or used on those companies, or are of any help.
• Other skills that of course may have impact on testing but not as to completely decide the competence: going to gym, playing guitar, having sense of humor, authority, helpful, cute (if referring to female testers ), or whatever that can improve the productivity in a team.

But of course the biggest problem is to hire just randomly. I guess its better to hire someone with a high(secondary to testing) skill than someone with no relevant skill at all, but from this approach we have the poison in the field this days. Too simple solutions as hiring automated testers are used today.

ShareThis