What Is a Principal Tester - 5 Years On

Four realisations that reshaped how I see the role and build quality in.

When I first became a Principal Tester in 2019, I had an idea of what I thought the role was, but few examples to follow. So I did what I thought made sense and learned by doing.

I shared my approach in my talk at TestBash 2020 titled “What Is a Principal Tester?“. I then followed up a few years later with a post for LeadDev, How Principal Testers Can Improve Company Processes.

Back then, my key takeaways were:

• Principal Testers are technical leaders, not managers. They stay hands-on while guiding teams to build in quality practices.

• Two models exist: the Expert model for short-term, embedded problem-solving, and the Quality Engineering model for longer-term enablement.

• Socio-technical thinking matters. You can’t fix quality without understanding people, processes, and products.

• Collaboration drives learning. Regular one-to-ones and cross-team discussions help spread good practice.

• Context is everything. Experts fix; Quality Engineers enable.

• Balance is key. The best principal testers move fluidly between both.

• Leadership support is crucial. Without it, long-term improvement doesn’t stick.

That was over five years ago. Since then, my understanding of the role has evolved in ways I didn’t expect. Here are four realisations that have reshaped how I see what being a Principal Tester means to me today.

1. From being guided to guiding yourself

Gone are the days when simply being in a team meant you’d learn from your peers. Teams are now looking to you to learn from. Over the last seven years, I’ve had to proactively nurture my personal development. Your manager might be able to help you, but that’s not what they’re there for anymore. They will expect you to tell them what you need, not for them to pry it out of you.

I’ve found that, with managers, you want someone who is a good coach and a champion of your approach. They don’t need to be able to do your job, but they do need to be able to coach you through tough problems and promote you across teams.

Gone are the days when simply being in a team meant you’d learn from your peers. Teams are now looking to you to learn from.

Two of the best ways I’ve found to further develop myself have been starting this newsletter. Writing regularly has vastly improved how I think and communicate about quality, and it gives me a way to direct people back to clearer explanations after chats.

The other has been reaching out to peers outside of my organisation. They are often contending with similar organisational issues but in different contexts, so being able to discuss these issues and approaches has been invaluable. Where do you find these peers? Well, some are ex-colleagues who have now moved on, and others are people that I’ve met at industry events. Networking becomes really important the further you get in your career, and if you're lucky, they may even become lifelong friends.

2. From having a team to building a network

Working across teams means you often don’t have a dedicated team of your own. That can leave you feeling isolated, so building a strong network across departments is vital.

These relationships help me decompress, reflect, and get feedback on ideas before acting. They’ve also become a source of new opportunities and advocacy for quality in spaces I can’t be present in myself.

My support network has become one of my biggest supporters. Amplifying my ideas, opening doors, and keeping me grounded.

My approach to building this network has been simple: reach out to peers for coffee and a chat. Sharing what we’re learning, what challenges we’re tackling, and how we see the system we work in behaving.

In some ways, it’s like sharing organisational gossip, but with the intent of understanding the system rather than fuelling rumours. With time, these informal chats have turned into regular catch-ups, ranging from fortnightly to monthly, and are often among my highlights of the week.

3. From fixing problems to playing to strengths

When I started, I thought being a Principal meant being able to do everything. Now, I realise the most effective approach is to lean into your strengths and partner where you’re weak.

I’ve found that not only do I enjoy doing talks and workshops, but I’m good at it too. So I leverage this approach to the best of my abilities. I found getting better at my strengths is not only easier but much more enjoyable, and as a result, I often find my good days vastly outnumber my bad ones.

Peter Drucker said in Managing Oneself:

“One should waste as little effort as possible on improving areas of low competence... It takes far more energy to improve from incompetence to mediocrity than from first-rate performance to excellence.”

That doesn’t mean I’ve given up on my weakness, but I’m well aware of them and know I’ll do poorly if that’s what I have to be strong in for a particular task. So know where you are strong, but also know the strengths of others, as they will be able to make up for your weaknesses.

In practice, this means focusing less on being the smartest person in the room and more on helping the room think better together.

4. From clear definitions to complex realities

When I first talked about the role, I framed Quality Engineering as a clear, structured model with the hope that we could have a unified meaning. But as the term's popularity has grown, I’ve realised it’s become quite overloaded. Everyone uses it, but few mean the same thing.

Some see Quality Engineering as test automation and no more manual testing and others just see it as another name for testers. There are quite a few myths about quality engineering, but I’ve found that without a definition, conversations quickly go off track so I generally start by clarifying what I mean before assuming we see QE the same way.

Quality Engineers are, in many ways, expert generalists. We might each have niche skills, for instance, test leadership, automation, coaching, but our value lies in our range.

Quality Engineers are, in many ways, expert generalists. We might each have niche skills, for instance, test leadership, automation, and coaching, but our value lies in our range. The ability to move seamlessly between testing, engineering, and delivery work enables us to connect the dots across disciplines, allowing us to empower teams to build quality in.

For me, 15 years of hands-on work before moving into a principal role gave me that range slowly over time. But you don’t need that long. Exposure to different teams, methods, and mentors can teach you a lot, especially if you have curiosity, humility and empathy.

Looking ahead

I’ve been a Principal Tester for seven years now, and it’s been an incredibly rewarding experience. At first, it was quite daunting trying to figure out what the role meant and how I would approach it. Feeling like an imposter was a regular occurrence, but taking things one step at a time has allowed me to grow in ways I never expected.

While I feel more confident operating at this level, I’m also well aware of my weaknesses and how to mitigate them. That’s been one of the most eye-opening parts of the role, how much it’s helped me get to know myself better and find opportunities to leverage my strengths to their full potential.

This is why I strongly believe that no two Principals should be the same. We should be encouraged to build on our strengths and work together to address our weaknesses.

I’m not sure where this role will take me next, but I’m looking forward to finding out. Maybe I’ll be back in a few years with a “10 Years On” post, hopefully with a few more lessons to add.