Is Manual Salesforce Testing Still Relevant in 2025?

Is Manual Salesforce Testing Still Relevant in 2025?

So when it comes to Salesforce testing, you might wonder: is there still a place for manual testing, or has automation made it obsolete? The answer might surprise you.


The Current State of Salesforce Testing

Before we dive into whether manual testing still matters, let's acknowledge the elephant in the room: automated testing has become incredibly powerful. Tools can now test thousands of scenarios in minutes, catch bugs before they reach production, and run continuously without human supervision.


But here's the thing—automation hasn't eliminated the need for manual testing. Instead, it's changed what manual testing looks like and when it makes sense to use it.


Where Manual Testing Still Shines


Exploratory Testing and User Experience

Some things simply can't be automated effectively. When a human tester explores a new feature, they notice things that automated scripts miss. Does this button feel intuitive? Is the color scheme accessible for colorblind users? Does the workflow make logical sense from a business perspective?


These qualitative assessments require human judgment, creativity, and empathy—qualities that automation tools don't possess in 2025, despite significant advances in artificial intelligence.


Visual and Aesthetic Validation

Automated tests can verify that a Lightning component loads, but they can't tell you if it looks good. Manual testers catch layout issues, alignment problems, and design inconsistencies that might pass automated checks but create poor user experiences.


Think about it: an automated test might confirm a button exists and is clickable, but only a human notices that the button is partially hidden behind another element or uses text that's difficult to read.


The Hybrid Approach: Best of Both Worlds


Strategic Division of Testing Responsibilities

The most effective Salesforce testing strategies in 2025 don't choose between manual and automated testing—they strategically combine both. Automation handles the repetitive, predictable scenarios, while manual testing tackles the nuanced, complex, and creative aspects.


This hybrid approach delivers better results than either method alone, similar to how successful businesses blend traditional and digital strategies, as explored on platforms like business north west.


When to Use Manual Testing

Manual Salesforce testing makes sense for:


Manual Testing for Complex Business Scenarios


Understanding Business Context

Automated tests execute predefined scripts, but they don't understand business context. A manual tester can evaluate whether a Salesforce configuration actually supports the business process it's meant to enable, not just whether it technically functions.


For example, a sales process might technically work but create unnecessary steps that frustrate sales reps. Only manual testing reveals these workflow inefficiencies.


Testing Integration from a User Perspective

When Salesforce integrates with other systems, automated tests verify data flows correctly. Manual testers verify the integration makes sense from a user's perspective—that it creates a seamless, logical experience rather than a technically functional but confusing process.


The Human Element in Testing


Catching Subtle Issues

Manual testers catch the subtle issues that slip past automation: unclear error messages, confusing field labels, illogical tab orders, and dozens of other small problems that collectively degrade user experience.


Accessibility Testing

While automated tools can check some accessibility standards, manual testing is essential for truly validating that your Salesforce org is usable by people with disabilities. This includes testing with actual assistive technologies and evaluating the experience from diverse user perspectives.


Cost Considerations in 2025


The Real Cost of Automation

Here's something that doesn't get discussed enough: automated testing isn't free. You need tools (which cost money), people who can write and maintain test scripts (specialized skills that command higher salaries), and infrastructure to run tests.

For smaller Salesforce orgs or specific testing scenarios, manual testing might actually be more cost-effective than building and maintaining automated test suites.


Quick Wins with Manual Testing

Sometimes you just need to quickly verify something before a release. Setting up automated tests might take hours or days, while a skilled manual tester can verify the functionality in minutes. This agility has real business value.


Manual Testing for Regulatory Compliance


Documented Human Verification

Some regulated industries require human verification of critical processes. While automated testing provides evidence that systems work correctly, compliance frameworks may specifically require manual testing documentation.


Audit Trail Requirements

Manual testing creates a different type of audit trail than automated testing—one that shows human judgment was applied to critical business processes. This can be valuable for compliance reviews and regulatory audits.


Training and Knowledge Transfer


Manual Testing as a Learning Tool

When new team members join your Salesforce team, having them perform manual testing is an excellent way to learn the system. They see how different components work together, understand business processes, and identify areas for improvement.


Domain Expertise Development

Manual testing helps team members develop deep domain expertise about your specific Salesforce implementation. This knowledge becomes invaluable for future development, troubleshooting, and optimization efforts.


The Changing Role of Manual Testers


From Testing to Test Design

In 2025, manual testers increasingly focus on designing test strategies rather than executing repetitive tests. They identify what needs testing, create test scenarios that automation can execute, and handle the complex testing that automation can't address.


This evolution makes manual testing roles more strategic and valuable, not less relevant.


User Advocacy

Manual testers serve as user advocates, representing the voice of actual Salesforce users. They question whether features truly meet user needs and whether the system delivers good user experiences, not just functional ones. This perspective is crucial, especially as customer experience becomes increasingly central to business success, similar to how audience engagement matters in digital marketing, as discussed on influencers gone wild.


Testing Mobile and Responsive Experiences


Real Device Testing

Automated mobile testing tools have improved dramatically, but they can't fully replicate the experience of actually using Salesforce on different devices, screen sizes, and network conditions. Manual testing on real devices remains important for validating mobile experiences.


Touch Interface Validation

Gestures, swipes, and touch interactions require manual testing to verify they feel natural and responsive. Automated tools can confirm functions execute, but only humans can judge whether the interaction feels right.


Security and Penetration Testing


Creative Security Testing

While automated security scans catch known vulnerabilities, manual security testing involves creative attempts to circumvent security measures. Human testers think like potential attackers, trying unexpected approaches that automated tools might miss.


Social Engineering Scenarios

Some security risks involve human behavior and social engineering. Manual testing can evaluate how your Salesforce security configuration holds up against realistic social engineering attempts.


The Future of Manual Testing


AI-Assisted Manual Testing

Looking ahead, manual testing won't disappear—it will evolve. AI tools will assist manual testers by suggesting test scenarios, highlighting areas that need attention, and automating repetitive aspects while preserving human judgment for complex decisions.


Increased Strategic Value

As automation handles routine testing, manual testers will focus on higher-value activities: test strategy, risk assessment, exploratory testing, and user experience validation. This makes manual testing more important strategically, even if less important tactically.


Making the Right Choice for Your Organization


Assessing Your Testing Needs

Is Manual Salesforce Testing Still Relevant in 2025? For your organization, the answer depends on factors like:


Conclusion

Is Manual Salesforce Testing Still Relevant in 2025? Absolutely. While automated testing has become more sophisticated and handles an increasing portion of testing workload, manual testing remains essential for scenarios requiring human judgment, creativity, and empathy.


The most successful Salesforce implementations don't abandon manual testing—they strategically integrate it with automation to create comprehensive testing strategies. Manual testing has evolved from being the primary testing method to being a specialized tool used where it provides the most value.


Testing Type Best Use Cases Key Strengths Manual Testing UX, exploration, complex scenarios Human judgment, flexibility Automated Testing Regression, load, repetitive tests Speed, consistency, coverage Hybrid Approach Comprehensive strategy Balanced efficiency and quality.


The question isn't whether to use manual testing in 2025—it's how to use it most effectively alongside automation. Organizations that embrace both approaches, using each where it provides the most value, will achieve the best testing outcomes and deliver the highest quality Salesforce experiences to their users.


Manual testing isn't obsolete. It's evolved, specialized, and more strategic than ever. And for the foreseeable future, it remains an indispensable part of quality Salesforce implementations.