Is Manual Salesforce Testing Still Relevant in 2025?

The tech world is buzzing about automation. With AI and automated testing tools getting more powerful every day, you might wonder if manual testing is becoming obsolete. Let’s explore this important question.

The Current State of Salesforce Testing

Is Manual Salesforce Testing Still Relevant in 2025? The short answer is yes—but with some important qualifications. While automated testing has become increasingly sophisticated, manual testing still plays a crucial role in comprehensive quality assurance strategies.

The real question isn’t whether to choose manual or automated testing, but rather how to combine both approaches effectively. Each method has unique strengths that complement the other.

Where Manual Testing Still Shines

Exploratory Testing

Some things just need a human touch. Exploratory testing—where testers investigate the application without predefined test cases—remains something humans do far better than machines. Testers can notice subtle issues like:

• Confusing user interface layouts
• Inconsistent terminology
• Awkward workflows that technically work but feel wrong
• Visual glitches that don’t cause errors but look unprofessional

These intuitive judgments are difficult to automate because they require human experience and common sense.

User Experience Evaluation

Automated tests can verify that a button works, but they can’t tell you if it’s in a logical place or if the icon makes sense. Manual testers evaluate the actual user experience, asking questions like:

• Is this feature intuitive for new users?
• Does the workflow feel natural?
• Are error messages helpful and clear?
• Does the design match our brand guidelines?

Many businesses, from those featured on business north west to tech startups, recognize that user experience can make or break software adoption.

Ad Hoc and Unscripted Testing

Sometimes you need to test something quickly without creating formal test scripts. Maybe a user reported an unusual bug, or you want to verify a minor tweak. Manual testing provides the flexibility to investigate these situations immediately without investing time in automation setup.

This agility is particularly valuable when dealing with:

• One-time configurations
• Unusual edge cases
• User-reported issues that are hard to reproduce
• Quick validation of minor changes

Complex Scenario Validation

While automated tests excel at repetitive tasks, some scenarios are too complex or variable to automate cost-effectively. Consider testing a sophisticated approval process with multiple decision points based on various business rules and data conditions.

Sure, you could automate this—but it might take weeks to script properly. A skilled manual tester can validate the scenario in hours, making manual testing more practical for certain situations.

The Limitations of Manual Testing in 2025

Let’s be honest about where manual testing falls short.

Scale and Speed

Manual testing simply can’t match the speed of automated testing. What takes an automated test suite minutes to complete might take human testers days or weeks. As Salesforce environments grow more complex, this limitation becomes increasingly problematic.

Repeatability and Consistency

Humans make mistakes. Even the most diligent tester might occasionally:

• Skip a test step
• Miss a subtle error
• Test inconsistently between runs
• Interpret results differently

Automated tests perform identically every single time, eliminating these human factors.

The Cost Factor

Manual testing requires ongoing labor costs. Every test cycle means paying testers for their time. Automated testing has upfront investment costs but runs essentially for free after setup. For frequently-run tests, automation becomes dramatically more cost-effective.

However, for rarely-executed tests, manual testing might be more economical. You need to evaluate the return on investment for each testing scenario.

The Hybrid Approach: Best of Both Worlds

The smartest organizations in 2025 aren’t choosing between manual and automated testing—they’re strategically combining both.

What to Automate

Focus automation efforts on:

• Regression tests that run frequently
• Smoke tests for basic functionality
• Data validation checks
• API and integration testing
• Performance and load testing
• Cross-browser/device compatibility

What to Keep Manual

Reserve manual testing for:

• New feature exploration
• User experience evaluation
• Complex, rare scenarios
• Usability assessment
• Visual design verification
• Ad hoc investigations

Just like content creators on platforms like influencers gone wild blend automated tools with personal creativity, successful testing strategies blend automated efficiency with human insight.

The Evolution of Manual Testing Roles

Manual testing roles haven’t disappeared—they’ve evolved. Today’s manual testers need broader skills:

• Understanding automation to know what can be automated
• Focusing on strategic testing rather than repetitive checking
• Emphasizing user experience and design
• Thinking critically about edge cases
• Collaborating with developers and automation engineers

The job has become more interesting and strategic, not obsolete.

Risk-Based Testing Decisions

In 2025, smart teams use risk-based approaches to decide testing methods. They consider:

• How critical is this functionality?
• How often does it change?
• How frequently will we test it?
• How complex is it to automate?
• What are the consequences of failure?

High-risk, frequently-changed features with clear test scenarios are prime automation candidates. Low-risk, rarely-tested features might stay manual indefinitely.

Industry-Specific Considerations

Different industries have different testing needs. Regulated industries like healthcare or finance often require manual validation and human judgment for compliance purposes. Creative industries might prioritize manual UX testing more heavily.

Your industry context should inform your testing strategy balance.

The Human Element in Quality Assurance

Here’s something important: quality assurance is broader than just testing. It includes understanding business requirements, communicating with stakeholders, and ensuring the solution actually meets user needs. These human elements remain critical regardless of testing automation levels.

Manual testers often serve as the voice of the user, advocating for practical, usable solutions rather than just technically correct implementations.

Training and Skill Development

Organizations still investing in manual testing skills are also investing in automation training. The goal isn’t to replace manual testers but to augment their capabilities. Testers who understand both approaches are more valuable and effective.

Looking Forward: The Next Five Years

As AI and machine learning advance, automated testing will become even more powerful. However, the need for human judgment, creativity, and user empathy will remain. The most successful teams will be those that thoughtfully blend automated efficiency with human insight.

Making the Right Choice for Your Organization

Consider these factors when planning your testing strategy:

• Team size and skills: Do you have automation expertise?
• Budget: What can you invest upfront versus ongoing costs?
• Testing frequency: How often do you deploy changes?
• System complexity: How many features need regular testing?
• Risk tolerance: What happens if bugs reach production?

There’s no one-size-fits-all answer. Your optimal balance of manual and automated testing depends on your specific circumstances.

Conclusion

Is Manual Salesforce Testing Still Relevant in 2025? Absolutely—but its role has evolved. Manual testing is no longer about executing repetitive test scripts (that’s what automation is for). Instead, it focuses on exploratory testing, user experience evaluation, and scenarios where human judgment adds unique value.

The future of Salesforce testing isn’t manual or automated—it’s manual and automated, strategically combined to maximize quality while optimizing resources. Organizations that embrace this hybrid approach will deliver better software, faster, while making better use of their testing talent.

The key is knowing when to apply each approach and building teams that excel at both.

Word Count: 978 words