Should QA Stop Writing Code? The Great Automation Debate of 2026
A VP at JPMorgan Chase said it: “Let developers write automated tests. Let QA focus solely on exploration and user journey validations manually. QA should be free from coding.” 207 reactions. 35 comments. The QA community exploded.
🎠Want to master this with real projects? Join the Playwright Automation Mastery course at The Testing Academy.
Contents
The Case FOR Developers Writing Tests
- Developers know the code intimately — they can write targeted tests faster
- Shift-left means testing at the source, not as a handoff
- AI coding tools make test generation trivial for developers
- QA time freed for exploration finds bugs automation never would
🚀 Level Up Your Playwright
From locators to CI pipelines — build a production-grade Playwright + TypeScript framework step by step.
The Case AGAINST Removing Code From QA
- Developers test their own assumptions — they have blind spots about their own code
- QA domain knowledge embedded in automation is irreplaceable
- Developers write tests to prove code works; QA writes tests to prove code breaks
- Removing coding from QA creates a career ceiling that drives talent away
The Middle Ground (Where Most Teams Should Land)
| Who Writes | What | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Developers | Unit tests, integration tests | Closest to the code, fastest feedback |
| QA/SDET | E2E tests, API contract tests, framework architecture | Cross-system perspective, user journey focus |
| QA (manual) | Exploratory testing, UX validation | Human judgment, domain knowledge, creativity |
| AI | Regression scaffolding, test data, failure analysis | Speed and scale for repetitive tasks |
The answer is not “QA should stop coding.” The answer is “everyone should test, but differently.”
🎓 Master Playwright End to End
Join hundreds of SDETs building real automation frameworks. Lifetime access, hands-on projects, and a job-ready portfolio.
