🚫 Why the New Generation Misunderstands Regression Testing — And Why It Matters

🧪 Regression ≠ Any Bug. Let’s Get That Straight.

If you've been leading or mentoring engineering teams in recent years, you’ve probably come across this: a developer (sometimes even a QA engineer) tags every defect found during testing as a "regression." Feature not working? Regression. Validation error? Regression. Backend timeout? Yup—regression again.

While it's easy to blame inexperience, the issue runs deeper: it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what regression testing and regression bugs actually mean—and the implications are serious for software quality, accountability, and velocity.

Let’s break it down.

🧠 What Is Regression Testing Really?

Regression Testing is the process of testing existing functionality after code changes, to ensure that new updates haven't inadvertently broken something that was previously working.

It is not just retesting. It's not exploratory testing. It’s a targeted check for known working parts of the system, after changes elsewhere.

✅ If it used to work in the last release and doesn’t now because of recent changes, it’s a regression.

🐞 So, What Is a Regression Bug?

A regression bug is a new failure in previously working functionality, introduced as a side effect of code or config changes.

This implies a few things:

• The feature worked in a prior build.
• The feature passed all its test cases before.
• A new change (even in an unrelated module) caused it to break.

If none of the above applies, calling it a regression muddies the waters.

🤷 Why the Misunderstanding?

1. Lack of Fundamental Training

Most modern bootcamps and crash courses don’t emphasize SDLC concepts, test strategies, or quality gates. Regression testing gets boiled down to “just test everything again.”

2. The Rise of Automation (and Misuse)

With so much focus on automated regression suites, people assume every test run is “regression testing,” and every failure is a “regression bug.” That’s not only incorrect, it’s dangerous.

3. Misuse of Labels in Tools like Jira

Tagging every bug with Regression in Jira or tagging every test suite as regression becomes a lazy habit. It's quick, easy, and wrong.

4. Lack of Product and QA Collaboration

When Dev and QA teams work in silos, bugs are classified without context. Features in progress or incomplete user stories are often mislabeled as regressions just because they fail in current builds.

⚠️ Why It Matters

Mislabeling bugs as regressions can lead to:

• 🔁 Wasted effort on triage and root cause
• 🎯 Misplaced accountability (e.g., blaming unrelated teams)
• 📉 Skewed metrics and false sense of risk
• 🧱 Broken trust between product, dev, and QA teams

Worse, it diminishes the value of real regression tracking, which is essential to measure the stability of a codebase.

✅ What We Should Teach Instead

🔄 A Simple Regression Flow

1. Identify the failing feature.
2. Confirm it worked previously.
3. Trace what has changed recently (code, infra, config).
4. Tag it as a regression only if it's broken due to change.

🧑🏫 Instill Good Practices

• Add regression test cases as part of sprint deliverables.
• Maintain a stable suite of known regression test cases.
• Treat regression bugs seriously — they indicate breakage in trust.

🤝 Encourage Collaboration

• QA should work closely with developers to understand the impact of every PR.
• Product teams should help define when a feature is considered “done” and stable.

💬 Final Thought

The next generation of developers and testers are smart, quick, and willing to learn. But we owe it to them to educate—not just on how to code or automate, but on why quality disciplines like regression testing exist in the first place.

Mislabeling every issue as a regression may seem harmless, but it slowly erodes the clarity and effectiveness of our software delivery lifecycle.

Let’s raise the bar—and call things what they truly are.