Why “Avoid QA Engineering” 5 Reasons and How to Find the Right Environment

The phrase “avoid QA engineering” is all over the internet — but the real problem isn’t the role itself. It’s the environment.

Monotonous work, long hours, and stagnant careers stem from workplaces that limit QA to test execution only, or from company cultures that treat quality as an afterthought.

Drawing on occupational data and labor surveys from Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, this article identifies the five specific reasons QA engineering gets a bad reputation — and provides concrete criteria for spotting environments worth avoiding.

1. Five Reasons People Say “Avoid QA Engineering”

The negative reputation surrounding QA engineering comes not from the role itself, but from specific working environments.

Below, we use data from Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) to break down the five concrete reasons people warn against QA engineering — and what’s really behind each one.

Reason 1. Manual-Testing-Only Workplaces Turn the Job Into Repetitive Busywork

Why It Feels Monotonous

The biggest cause of monotony for QA engineers is workplaces that limit them to running tests — nothing more.

The MHLW Job Tag database classifies quality assurance engineers as specialists, yet many real-world workplaces treat them as operators whose only job is to mechanically execute test cases.

When there’s no involvement in test design or quality strategy — just following a script step by step — there’s no room for creative thinking. Repeating the same operations dozens or hundreds of times provides no skill growth and accumulates mental fatigue.

SES (System Engineering Service) placements in particular tend to involve only the client’s test execution phase, leaving QA engineers structurally excluded from upstream work like test planning or automation discussions.

What the Data Shows

The MHLW Job Tag defines quality assurance engineers’ responsibilities as including “design and improvement of quality assurance processes,” “test strategy development,” and “quality metrics management” — all high-expertise functions.

However, according to surveys by the Information-Technology Promotion Agency (IPA), test automation adoption rates vary significantly by company size, and manual-testing-dominated workplaces remain common in smaller projects.

In SES environments, it’s typical to spend months executing test cases for a single product, then rotate to a new site when the project ends — making systematic skill development extremely difficult.

(Sources: MHLW Job Tag “Quality Assurance Engineer”, Information-Technology Promotion Agency (IPA))

Characteristics of Workplaces That Avoid This

Environments that escape the monotony trap share clear characteristics.

Established CI/CD Pipelines

• Modern test automation tools like Playwright, Cypress, or Selenium are in active use
• QA engineers can contribute to writing test code and improving automation coverage
• Quality is maintained through a continuous integration system

QA Ownership and Decision-Making Authority

• QA is involved from the test strategy phase
• Engineers have a say in what gets tested and how
• QA participates in setting quality standards

In job listings, keywords like “test design,” “quality strategy,” and “automation in CI/CD environments” are positive signals. Listings that mention only “test execution” are likely to involve primarily repetitive manual work.

Reason 2. Long Hours Before Releases Are Structurally Built In

Why QA Gets Slammed Right Before Deadlines

Long working hours in QA are a structural problem rooted in how development processes are designed.

In waterfall development, the quality assurance phase sits at the end of the project — which means any upstream delays get absorbed entirely by compressing the testing window.

Even when development runs over schedule, the release date doesn’t move. QA is expected to maintain the same level of quality assurance in a fraction of the originally planned time.

The result: some workplaces see weeks of nightly overtime and weekend work in the lead-up to every release.

In workplaces that don’t practice “shift-left” (early QA involvement), delays in getting QA engaged during requirements or design phases cause problems to surface all at once, late in the cycle.

What the Labor Data Shows

According to the MHLW’s “IT Industry Work Style Reform” survey, 49% of IT workers report monthly overtime below 20 hours — but increased working hours around release periods are widely reported across many workplaces.

Non-scheduled working hours in the information and communications industry exceed the all-industry average, with particularly pronounced peaks and valleys in project-based work.

The same survey notes growing adoption of flextime systems, with more companies enabling flexible working arrangements.

However, even where such policies exist, the reality is that they often can’t be used during the intense pressure of a release crunch.

(Source: MHLW “IT Industry Work Style Reform | Survey and Analysis Results”)

Environments Where Long Hours Can Be Avoided

The following characteristics indicate workplaces where overwork is less likely.

Agile Development with In-Sprint Testing

• Testing is completed within short development cycles (two weeks or one month)
• Workload spikes are avoided by spreading testing continuously
• Continuous integration automatically runs tests on every code change

Shift-Left in Practice

• QA is involved from the requirements definition stage
• QA-focused reviews reduce costly rework in later stages
• Developers and QA collaborate to “build in” quality from the start

An Organizational Culture That Treats QA as Strategic

• The QA team has adequate staffing and time
• Releases aren’t forced on impossible schedules
• Sustainable working conditions are the norm

Reason 3. The Weight of Responsibility for Missing Bugs Is Heavy

The Pressure of Being the Last Line of Defense

The heaviest psychological burden QA engineers carry is the pressure of “you can’t miss a bug.”

As the final checkpoint in quality assurance, any defect a QA engineer misses goes straight to production — where it can impact real users.

When serious incidents occur — service outages, data loss — the question “why didn’t QA catch this?” tends to land squarely on QA’s shoulders.

Even when a quality problem was introduced during development, it often gets framed as QA’s failure for not catching it at the final check.

Data on the Impact of Quality Issues

The METI “DX Report” highlights the significant impact that system quality issues can have on business operations.

Lost revenue from service outages, erosion of customer trust, and recovery costs — the consequences of quality failures are enormous. In recent years, serious incidents involving personal data breaches through security failures have threatened the survival of entire organizations.

Against this backdrop, expectations placed on QA engineers have risen every year. Yet demanding “perfect quality” when testing windows and headcount are insufficient is, in reality, an impossible ask.

(Source: METI “DX Report”)

Environments Where Pressure Is Managed Appropriately

The following traits characterize workplaces where pressure is handled in a healthy way.

A Culture Where Quality Is Everyone’s Responsibility

• “Quality is everyone’s job” is a shared belief across the organization
• Developers write thorough unit tests and use code review to build in quality
• QA’s role in overall quality strategy is clearly defined and respected

A Trust-Based Relationship Between Developers and QA

• Bugs found by QA are received as opportunities for improvement
• The relationship is collaborative, not adversarial
• A genuine culture of quality improvement exists

Automated Regression Testing to Lighten the Load

• Full manual verification of all features after every change is not required
• QA can focus on new feature validation and exploratory testing
• Time is spent on higher-value work

■Related Reading

Career stagnation is one of the biggest risks in QA engineering — especially in SES environments. This guide outlines proven strategies for foreign engineers to keep growing and advancing their careers in Japan’s tech industry.

Reason 4. In SES Environments, Skills Stagnate and Career Direction Becomes Unclear

Why Career Progression Becomes Hard to See

Career stagnation is a particularly serious problem for QA engineers in SES environments. Hopping between test-execution-only assignments doesn’t build rare skills or grow market value.

Being dispatched to a new site every few months, with different tasks each time, makes it very hard to build systematic expertise in any one area.

The worst case is a workplace with no involvement in test design or automation. If the only work is executing pre-written test cases, you won’t develop the ability to design what tests are needed — nor the automation skills to make testing more efficient.

The result: after years in the role, you remain a “test runner,” and your career options narrow.

Data on Career Stagnation

The MHLW Job Tag defines the skills required of quality assurance engineers to include test design methods, quality management techniques, use of automation tools, and quality metrics design — all high-expertise competencies.

However, a skill set limited to test execution alone cannot fulfill these requirements, and salaries in that range often stay between ¥3–5 million.

The METI “Survey on IT Human Resource Supply and Demand” projects a shortage of up to 790,000 IT professionals by 2030 — but skill-based supply-demand gaps also exist within this figure.

Professionals with advanced test automation skills or quality assurance expertise in DevOps environments are in high demand, with salaries above ¥7 million achievable.

By contrast, a skill set limited to manual test execution sees limited demand and limited salary growth.

(Sources: MHLW Job Tag “Quality Assurance Engineer”, METI “Survey on IT Human Resource Supply and Demand”)

Environments With a Clear Career Path

The following traits characterize workplaces where career progression is real.

A Path to SDET (Software Development Engineer in Test)

• A role that combines both development and testing skills
• Responsibilities include building test infrastructure and developing automation frameworks
• Salaries above ¥7 million are not unusual

Growth Into Test Automation Engineer or QA Architect

• Responsibilities include test strategy development and quality metrics design
• Upstream involvement in tool selection and automation implementation
• High expertise and strong market value

QA Organization Positioning in In-House Product Companies

• Clear paths to QA Manager or QA Director roles exist
• Career steps within the organization are visible and defined
• Opportunities for skill development and promotion are provided

■Related Reading

Before evaluating any offer, it helps to know the salary benchmarks for IT engineers in Japan. This guide breaks down compensation by role and experience level so you can assess whether an offer reflects your true market value.

Reason 5. Salary Growth Is Genuinely Difficult — a Real-World Problem

What the Salary Data Shows

On QA engineer compensation: the MHLW Job Tag lists the average salary for quality assurance engineers at ¥5.502 million.

This exceeds Japan’s national average of ¥4.61 million (National Tax Agency survey), but sits in the middle of the pack among IT roles overall.

The distribution is wide. Test-execution-focused workplaces often see starting salaries in the ¥3 million range, while highly specialized positions in test automation or SDET roles can reach ¥7 million or more. The difference comes down to skill set and scope of responsibilities.

(Source: MHLW Job Tag “Quality Assurance Engineer”)

Why Salary Growth Stalls

The primary reason QA engineer salaries plateau is the low perceived value of manual-testing-only work.

“Just running test cases” tends to be viewed as something anyone can do — unlike development work such as programming or system design — and compensation is set accordingly.

The MHLW’s “IT Industry Work Style Reform” survey data also confirms that salary levels within the IT industry vary significantly by role and specialization.

Roles that don’t involve writing code, or that center on routine, repeatable tasks, tend to see limited salary growth.

(Source: MHLW “IT Industry Work Style Reform | Survey and Analysis Results”)

Conditions That Enable High Salaries

Achieving a high salary as a QA engineer requires the following conditions.

Market Value of Test Automation Skills

• Proficiency with tools like Playwright, Cypress, or Selenium
• Professionals who can write test code often see ¥6 million+ opportunities
• The ability to build CI/CD pipelines and design test frameworks can bring salaries of ¥7–10 million within reach

Moving Into SDET or QA Manager Roles

• SDETs — who bridge development and testing — earn salaries on par with or exceeding those of development engineers
• QA Managers who lead teams and define quality strategy typically earn ¥7 million or more

Head of Quality Positions at In-House Product Companies

• Roles that drive organization-wide quality improvement initiatives
• Strong compensation and a stable career trajectory

■Related Reading

Spotting red flags before you join is critical. This handbook gives IT professionals a broader framework for identifying toxic workplaces in Japan — covering warning signs that apply across engineering roles, not just QA.

2. Five Red Flags for Identifying a Toxic QA Workplace

Avoiding bad environments is critical for QA engineers. Here are five warning signs to look for in job listings and interviews.

If multiple red flags apply to a prospective employer, proceed with caution.

Red Flag 1. The Job Listing Only Mentions “Test Execution”

A listing that describes only “test execution” — with no mention of “test design” or “quality strategy” — is a warning sign. It strongly suggests the workplace treats QA engineers as task workers rather than specialists.

Warning Signs

• No mention of “test design” or “quality strategy”
• The only required skill listed is “Excel proficiency”
• SES placement with vague or unspecified project details

Companies genuinely seeking skilled QA engineers will specify concrete responsibilities like “test plan development,” “quality metrics design,” and “test automation implementation.” The absence of these signals a high probability of repetitive, low-autonomy work.

Red Flag 2. No Test Automation Plans or Track Record

A company that doesn’t mention any automation plans or achievements may have low appetite for investing in quality assurance. In modern software development, test automation is essential for maintaining both quality and efficiency.

Warning Signs

• No CI/CD tooling mentioned
• Only manual testing tools are listed
• Vague language like “considering automation in the future”

In companies with no concrete automation efforts, QA engineers are stuck in manual test cycles with limited opportunities to grow. Always ask about the automation tools in use and any targets for automation coverage.

Red Flag 3. The QA Team’s Organizational Position Is Unclear

When a company can’t clearly explain where QA sits in the organization, it may not treat quality assurance as a strategic function.

When QA is treated as a subordinate function within the development department, QA engineers have little influence — making it hard to conduct meaningful quality assurance work.

Warning Signs

• QA is treated as a sub-function of the development department
• Quality policy is not reflected in business strategy
• No explanation of QA’s authority or decision-making power

In ideal environments, the QA department reports directly to leadership, and quality policy is embedded in corporate strategy. In interviews, ask specifically about “QA’s position in the org chart” and “who makes decisions on quality.”

Red Flag 4. Signs of Chronic Long Working Hours

Companies that won’t disclose actual overtime data — or use vague language like “some overtime during busy periods” — may have normalized excessive working hours.

MHLW surveys show that flexible working is advancing in the IT industry, but the reality varies enormously from one workplace to another.

Warning Signs

• Actual overtime figures are not disclosed
• Only vague references to overtime “during busy periods”
• No flextime or remote work policies in place

In interviews, ask specifically: “What was the average monthly overtime over the past three months?” and “What does overtime look like during a release crunch?”

Red Flag 5. No Explanation of Career Path or Evaluation Criteria

Companies with vague development plans and unclear evaluation systems for QA engineers risk treating people as disposable resources.

Without a defined career path, long-term growth is unlikely — and the risk of skill stagnation is high.

Warning Signs

• No clear development plan for QA engineers
• Vague criteria for promotion and salary increases
• No upskilling support (certification funding, training programs)

Strong companies will outline a concrete path from QA engineer to test architect, SDET, or QA manager. Support for certifications like JSTQB, and regular training opportunities, are also important indicators.

3. Five Green Flags for Choosing a Healthy QA Workplace

Avoiding bad environments is important — but actively seeking out great ones matters just as much. Here are five hallmarks of workplaces where QA engineers can genuinely grow.

Green Flag 1. Quality Is Embedded in Business Strategy

Companies that treat quality assurance as central to their business strategy value QA engineers as key contributors.

In these organizations, the QA department reports directly to leadership, and quality policies and goals are formally documented.

What Strong Companies Look Like

• QA reports directly to executive leadership
• Quality policies and targets are documented and built into KPIs
• Quality-related investments are tracked and disclosed

In companies where leadership takes quality seriously, QA engineers’ proposals are more likely to influence business decisions — making the work genuinely meaningful.

In interviews, ask about “quality policy” and “quality-related KPIs” to gauge how seriously the company takes it.

Green Flag 2. Test Automation and CI/CD Are Already in Place

Companies where test automation and CI/CD are already implemented — and continuously improved — offer an ideal environment for QA engineers to grow their skills.

It’s important that automation coverage targets are clearly stated and that modern tooling is actively used.

What Strong Companies Look Like

• Current automation coverage and targets are clearly communicated
• Modern tools like Playwright, Cypress, or k6 are in active use
• CI/CD infrastructure using GitHub Actions, Jenkins, or similar is established

In companies using these tools, QA engineers contribute to writing test code and improving automation frameworks — building high-value, marketable skills.

Green Flag 3. Shift-Left (Early QA Involvement) Is Practiced

Companies where QA is involved from the requirements stage — building quality in early through “shift-left” practices — are ideal environments.

In these organizations, QA engineers are treated as quality strategy partners, not just test runners.

What Strong Companies Look Like

• QA participates from the requirements definition stage
• Agile development with in-sprint testing is standard
• Collaboration between developers and QA is explicitly established

Where shift-left is practiced, there’s less rework in later stages and less crunch before releases. Collaboration with developers creates a shared understanding of quality — and a more manageable working environment.

Green Flag 4. Clear Evaluation Criteria and Career Path

Companies with well-defined evaluation frameworks and career progression for QA engineers are the best environments for long-term growth.

It’s important that concrete career steps — such as test architect, SDET, and QA manager — are clearly laid out.

What Strong Companies Look Like

• A defined path to test architect and SDET roles exists
• Certification support programs (e.g., JSTQB) are available
• Both management and specialist tracks are clearly offered

When evaluation criteria are transparent and skill growth is reflected in compensation, it’s easier to stay motivated and keep developing. In interviews, ask about “promotions in the past three years” and “how many people have used the certification support program.”

Green Flag 5. Transparent Working Conditions with Proven Track Record

Companies that openly share overtime and remote work data — and actively commit to work style reform — make sustainable working conditions a reality.

It’s important that policies align with the work style reform guidelines promoted by the MHLW.

What Strong Companies Look Like

• Actual overtime data is disclosed
• Remote work and flextime utilization rates are stated explicitly
• Policies align with the MHLW’s work style reform framework

MHLW surveys show that flextime and remote work adoption is growing in the IT industry — but actual utilization rates vary significantly between companies.

In interviews, ask specifically: “What percentage of employees use the flex system?” and “What is the remote work utilization rate?”

4. A Specific Question List for Job Listings and Interviews

Scrutinizing job listings and asking the right questions in interviews are the most effective tools for avoiding toxic workplaces and finding good ones. Here are the specific items to check and the questions to ask.

What to Check in Job Listings

Job listings reveal a company’s true priorities. Always confirm the following.

Responsibilities

• Does it include “test design” and “quality strategy”?
• Is it limited to “test execution” only?
• Is upstream involvement explicitly mentioned?

Tools

• Are automation tools like Selenium, Playwright, or Cypress listed?
• Are CI/CD tools (GitHub Actions, Jenkins, etc.) mentioned?
• Is it limited to manual testing tools only?

Required Skills

• Does it include “automation” or “scripting”?
• Is “Excel proficiency” the only required skill?
• Are programming languages (Python, JavaScript, etc.) mentioned?

Work Environment

• Are remote and flextime options available?
• Is a salary range stated?
• Is an overtime estimate provided?

5 Questions You Must Ask in Every Interview

Interviews are your best opportunity to verify what a company is actually like. These five questions are essential.

Question 1: Org Structure and Decision-Making Process

“Where does the QA team sit in the organization, and who does it report to?”

This tells you whether QA is treated as a strategic function or as a subordinate service team. A direct reporting line to leadership signals that the company takes quality seriously.

Question 2: Test Automation Coverage and Targets

“What is your current test automation coverage, what’s your target for this term, and what tools are you using?”

If they can cite specific numbers and targets, that’s a strong sign of genuine investment in quality. Vague answers suggest automation hasn’t been meaningfully prioritized.

Question 3: Career Path and Promotion Examples

“What are the career paths for QA engineers here, and can you share examples of promotions in the past three years?”

Concrete examples confirm that career advancement is real, not theoretical. Vague or absent examples suggest the career framework exists on paper only.

Question 4: Actual Working Hours

“What was the average monthly overtime over the past three months, and what does it peak at during a release?”

A company willing to share specific numbers is being transparent about working conditions. Companies that won’t disclose data are often hiding normalized overwork.

Question 5: Quality Improvements Driven by QA

“Can you share a specific example of a quality improvement that QA proposed and that was actually implemented?”

This tells you whether QA’s voice is genuinely respected. A concrete example signals that QA engineers have real influence — and can find meaningful work there.

■Related Reading

As you build your skills and seek better environments, understanding your legal rights around overtime in Japan is equally important. This article explains the rules, protections, and realities of IT overtime that every engineer should know.

5. Skill Strategies to Increase Your Market Value as a QA Engineer

To escape the “avoid QA engineering” scenario and achieve strong market value, strategic skill development is essential.

Here’s a level-by-level skill map with corresponding salary ranges, plus concrete steps for increasing your income.

Skill Map by Level and Corresponding Salary Range

Entry Level (¥3.5–4.5 million)

At entry level, the focus is on fundamental test techniques and quality management knowledge. Based on MHLW Job Tag data, the salary range at this level is approximately ¥3.5–4.5 million.

Skills to Develop

• Test case design techniques (equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis)
• Bug tracking tools (Jira, Backlog)
• Basic SQL
• Test documentation

Recommended Certifications

• JSTQB Foundation Level (Japan Software Testing Qualifications Board)

(Source: MHLW Job Tag “Quality Assurance Engineer”)

Mid Level (¥5–7 million)

At mid level, test automation skills and hands-on experience in CI/CD environments are expected. Reaching this level significantly increases your market value.

Skills to Develop

• Test automation (Selenium, Playwright, Cypress)
• Scripting languages (Python, JavaScript, TypeScript)
• CI/CD tools (GitHub Actions, CircleCI)
• Performance testing (k6, JMeter)
• API testing

Recommended Certifications

• JSTQB Advanced Level
• AWS certification

Senior Level (¥7–10 million+)

At senior level, the role involves leading test strategy development and quality architecture design — driving quality improvement across the organization.

Skills to Develop

• Test framework design and architecture
• Test strategy development and quality metrics design
• Security testing (OWASP ZAP, Burp Suite)
• Cloud-based test automation (AWS, Azure, GCP)
• QA team management

Recommended Certifications

• ISTQB Test Manager
• Certified Scrum Master
• Cloud vendor advanced certifications

4 Concrete Methods to Increase Your Salary

1. Build a Track Record in Test Automation

Test automation is the most effective way to increase your market value as a QA engineer. Making your results visible and sharing them externally will significantly boost how you’re evaluated in the job market.

How to Build a Track Record

• Quantifiable automation improvements (e.g., increasing coverage from 20% to 80%)
• Publishing test code on GitHub or contributing to open source
• Sharing insights through a technical blog
• Presenting at internal study sessions

Automation results must be expressed in numbers. Achievements like “reduced test execution time by 90%” or “achieved 100% automation of regression tests” are powerful talking points in job applications.

2. Pursue Strategic Certifications

Professional certifications are an effective way to objectively demonstrate your skills. Internationally recognized credentials in particular increase your value in the job market.

High-Priority Certifications

• JSTQB Advanced Level or higher (Japan Software Testing Qualifications Board)
• ISTQB Expert Level (international certification)
• Cloud vendor certifications (AWS, Azure, GCP)
• Certified Scrum Master (valuable in agile environments)

Certifications are most valuable when used as a structured path to deeper knowledge — not just titles. JSTQB Advanced Level, for instance, covers advanced test design techniques and test management concepts.

3. Expand Into Upstream Involvement

Moving beyond test execution into upstream processes dramatically increases your market value. Experience in quality strategy development and test architecture design opens doors to higher-paying positions.

How to Get Upstream Involvement

• Gain experience developing test strategy and test plans
• Contribute to quality metrics design and monitoring
• Build experience leading or managing a QA team
• Participate in reviews from the requirements definition stage

Upstream involvement can be initiated by proactively proposing improvements at your current workplace. Self-initiated efforts — like “proposing a test plan improvement” or “building a quality metrics dashboard” — create career advancement opportunities.

4. Realize Your Market Value Through a Job Change or Going Independent

Once you’ve built strong skills, realizing their market value through a job change or going freelance is an important step. The same skills can yield very different salaries depending on the company and working arrangement.

Job Change Options

• Moving to an in-house product company (stable career path)
• Transitioning to an SDET role (bridging development and testing)
• Moving to a foreign IT company (higher salary potential)

Going Freelance

• Demand for professionals with advanced test automation skills is high
• The QA consulting market is also expanding

※ Freelance market rates vary significantly by project and region. As a reference point: highly skilled QA engineers can find contracts at ¥800,000–1,000,000 per month, but these require commensurate experience and a proven track record.

■Related Reading

To understand where QA engineering fits in Japan’s evolving tech landscape, it helps to see the bigger picture. This market analysis covers the state of Japan’s IT industry, key trends, and what they mean for your career trajectory.

■Ready to Put Your QA Skills to Work at the Right Company? (N2+ Japanese Required)

Building test automation skills is only half the equation — you need a workplace that recognizes and rewards them. BLOOMTECH Career for Global connects foreign IT engineers with N2-level Japanese or above to companies in Japan where QA engineers have real influence, clear career paths, and competitive compensation.

▼Contact BLOOMTECH Career for Global here

6. The Future of QA Engineering: Demand in the Age of AI

Many people worry that AI will replace QA engineers. This section examines the future of QA engineering based on publicly available data, and looks at where demand is heading in an AI-driven world.

Future Outlook Based on IT Human Resource Supply and Demand

The METI “Survey on IT Human Resource Supply and Demand” projects a shortage of up to 790,000 IT professionals by 2030.

As digital transformation (DX) accelerates, demand for software development continues to expand — and so does demand for quality assurance professionals.

Several factors are driving this growing need for QA talent.

First, DX is accelerating the digitization of core business systems and services, amplifying the impact of quality failures on business operations.

Second, public expectations for service quality are rising — service outages and security incidents are becoming less and less tolerable.

IPA research also highlights the growing importance of quality assurance as digital transformation deepens.

Increasing system complexity, faster development cycles, and more demanding security requirements are all driving greater need for specialized QA expertise.

(Sources: METI “Survey on IT Human Resource Supply and Demand”, Information-Technology Promotion Agency (IPA))

What AI Can and Can’t Replace

AI is not capable of fully replacing QA engineers — at least not today. Understanding what AI can handle versus what still requires human judgment is key.

What AI Can Replace

• Simple test case execution
• Regression test automation
• Generation of routine test data
• Automated classification of bug reports

What Only Humans Can Do

• Quality strategy development
• UX quality evaluation
• Stakeholder alignment and negotiation
• Reconciling business requirements with quality standards
• Discovering latent issues through exploratory testing
• Prioritizing quality risks

AI functions as a tool for making simple, repetitive tasks more efficient.

Work requiring business understanding, creative thinking, and interpersonal coordination — the kind of judgment-heavy work that defines a mature QA engineer — will continue to be done by humans.

If anything, being freed from routine tasks by AI means QA engineers can focus more of their time on higher-value work.

3 Reasons Demand for QA Engineers Will Keep Growing

Three core reasons explain why demand for QA engineers will continue to rise.

Reason 1. Quality Assurance Is Critical to Business Credibility

In an increasingly digital world, system quality is directly linked to business credibility.

Service outages, data breaches, and security incidents drive customer churn and destroy business value.

The METI “DX Report” emphasizes the importance of system quality, marking an era where investment in quality assurance is a key differentiator for competitive advantage.

Reason 2. Growing Service Complexity Demands More Sophisticated Test Strategies

Advances in cloud, microservices, and API-driven architectures are making systems more complex.

Environments where multiple services interact require sophisticated test strategies — integration testing, performance testing, security testing, and more.

In these environments, demand grows for QA engineers who can do more than execute tests — those who can design the strategy itself.

Reason 3. DevOps and CI/CD Environments Require Continuous Quality Assurance

As DevOps culture takes hold, development and release cycles are accelerating.

In CI/CD environments, code changes ship frequently — making automated test pipelines essential infrastructure, not optional.

QA engineers with skills in test automation, CI/CD pipeline design, and quality metrics monitoring play a central role in DevOps organizations.

7. Who Is — and Isn’t — Suited to QA Engineering

Understanding whether QA engineering is a good fit for you is one of the most important things to figure out when choosing a career direction. Here’s a breakdown of traits that make a strong QA engineer — and traits that may signal a poor fit.

Traits of People Who Thrive as QA Engineers

If you recognize the following traits in yourself, there’s a strong chance you’ll build a rewarding career in QA engineering.

Sharp Observational Skills and Attention to Detail

The core purpose of a QA engineer is to find problems that others overlook.

People who pay close attention to small details and catch the slightest anomaly are naturally suited to quality assurance work. A personality that doesn’t mind double- and triple-checking is also a real asset.

Logical Thinking and Hypothesis-Building for Bug Reproduction

When a defect is found, reproducing it and identifying the root cause requires logical thinking.

The ability to form and test hypotheses — “under what conditions does this occur?” and “why does this happen?” — is indispensable for a QA engineer.

Communication Skills for Constructive Dialogue With Developers

QA engineers are in the position of reporting defects and requesting fixes from developers.

Rather than simply pointing out problems, the most effective QA engineers engage constructively and collaborate toward higher quality. The ability to build a collaborative rather than adversarial relationship with developers is essential.

A Continuous Appetite for Learning

Test automation tools, CI/CD platforms, new testing methodologies — the technology landscape for QA engineers is constantly evolving.

People who are genuinely curious about new tools and methods, and who commit to ongoing learning, will maintain their market value as QA engineers.

A Thorough, Detail-Oriented Nature (Even If Called “Worrying Too Much”)

What’s often labeled a weakness — being anxious or overly cautious — becomes a strength in QA engineering.

The tendency to keep asking “is this really okay?” and “have we checked all the other cases?” translates directly into rigorous quality assurance. That underlying concern for correctness drives thoroughness — which is exactly what the role demands.

Traits of People Who May Not Be a Good Fit

If you recognize the following traits in yourself, QA engineering may not be the right fit. That said, many of these concerns can be significantly mitigated by choosing the right environment.

A Strong Aversion to Repetitive Work

QA work includes a degree of repetition. Regression testing (verifying existing features still work) and multi-environment verification often involve similar tasks run repeatedly.

People who find this kind of repetition genuinely painful may struggle in manual-testing-heavy environments.

However, in workplaces where automation is well established, much of this repetitive work is handled automatically — and QA engineers can focus on more creative tasks. This concern is greatly reduced by choosing the right environment.

A Big-Picture Personality Who Doesn’t Sweat the Details

Quality assurance demands attention to detail. Noticing a slightly off display, a subtle behavioral anomaly, or a bug that only appears at the edge of a use case — these require genuine attentiveness.

People who tend to overlook small things will find it difficult to fulfill a quality assurance role effectively.

Strong Discomfort With Interpersonal Tension

QA engineers report defects and request fixes — and occasionally disagree with developers about priorities or severity.

People who find interpersonal friction so uncomfortable that they avoid it at all costs may end up compromising quality standards to keep the peace.

That said, in companies where quality is genuinely a shared responsibility, the friction between QA and developers is much lower — and a collaborative relationship is easier to build.

Passive, Unable to Propose Improvements

QA engineers are expected to identify opportunities to improve quality assurance processes and actively propose changes.

People who ask “could we automate this?” or “could we streamline this process?” — and who follow through on those ideas — are the ones who grow. A purely reactive posture — doing only what’s assigned — tends to result in career stagnation.

However, in companies with a culture that welcomes and implements QA-driven suggestions, proposing improvements becomes much more natural. The right environment makes a big difference here too.

An Important Caveat

These traits reflect general tendencies — they are not absolute disqualifiers.

Many of the concerns above can be substantially reduced by choosing the right environment. Honestly assessing your own strengths while being strategic about where you work makes it entirely possible to build a fulfilling career as a QA engineer.

8. Supplementary Note: The Difference Between a QA Engineer and a Tester

QA engineers and testers are distinct roles.

QA (Quality Assurance)

QA (Quality Assurance) covers the design and improvement of the entire quality assurance process. Responsibilities include test strategy development, driving automation, and managing quality metrics.

Tester

A tester’s primary role centers on executing test cases. The MHLW Job Tag classifies quality assurance engineers as specialists — a distinction that is reflected in market perception and compensation.

This article focuses primarily on QA engineers, but transitioning from a tester role into a QA engineering career is entirely achievable.

■Let Us Help You Find a QA Role Worth Saying Yes To (N2+ Japanese Required)

The right QA environment exists — and finding it is much easier with the right support. BLOOMTECH Career for Global specializes in matching foreign IT engineers who speak Japanese at N2 level or above with companies in Japan that treat quality assurance as a strategic priority. Register in 30 seconds and get matched for free.

▼Contact BLOOMTECH Career for Global here

9. Summary: “Avoid QA Engineering” Depends on the Environment — and Can Be Overcome With Strategic Choices

The reasons behind “avoid QA engineering” aren’t the role itself — they’re workplaces that confine QA to test execution only, and company cultures that treat quality as a low priority.

As MHLW data confirms, quality assurance engineers are recognized as specialists. With the right environment and deliberate skill investment, a high-value career in QA is entirely achievable.

The key is avoiding the five red flags and actively seeking workplaces with green flags. Checking job listings for “test design” and “quality strategy,” looking for concrete automation track records, understanding where QA sits in the org chart, assessing transparency around working hours, and confirming a clear career path are all concrete ways to filter out toxic environments.

With test automation skills and expanded involvement in upstream work, salaries above ¥7 million are achievable. Approach the market with data and clear evaluation criteria — and quality assurance can become a genuinely rewarding professional path.