I am currently a lead tester at a new company. I am currently experiencing a reluctance to conduct analysis of the business requirements and system requirements to derive the test objectives and test conditions.
(We are using the Waterfall approach)
The process that I am following at the moment is for each requirement (Be it from a BRD or SRD) i create a test objective where applicable and then many test conditions where applicable.
From there I take test objectives and conditions, conduct risk/impact analysis on them all and then list the test objectives/conditions which are to go in to each script. The scripts are then created (We hold a review at the end of each stage.) We then have an exploratory pre test and then execute the scripts.
I am currently being pressed to explain the benefit compared with doing no up front analysis of the design documents and to just start testing and write scripts by just looking at the system.
I realise i have been brief in my description of the situation and processes used, although would appreciate your thoughts and comments on the two different approaches.