Code Review

Code reviews help our team maintain quality and share knowledge effectively.

What is effective code review?

Effective code review is a collaborative process where peers examine each other's code systematically to ensure quality, share knowledge, and catch potential issues before they reach production. In the context of developer experience, high-quality code reviews are characterized by:

1. Timeliness - Reviews happen promptly, preventing work from being blocked
2. Value - Feedback is constructive, educational, and improves the code
3. Balance - Reviews are thorough without being overly nitpicky
4. Clarity - Comments and suggestions are clear and actionable

The survey question "Code reviews are timely and provide valuable feedback" measures whether your organization's review process supports developer productivity rather than hindering it.

Why are effective code reviews crucial for developer experience?

They prevent productivity bottlenecks

When code reviews are delayed, developers get stuck waiting for feedback, often context-switching to other tasks and losing momentum. As one engineering leader noted:

"Breaking work into smaller pieces improves the predictability of the entire development process. This applies to everything from task batching to code reviews. The whole system works more efficiently in terms of timelines, required effort, and overall predictability."

Director of Engineering at Networking and Communications Company

They accelerate team learning and knowledge sharing

Good code reviews are one of the most effective ways for knowledge to spread within a team. They expose developers to different approaches and create teaching moments that elevate the entire team's capabilities.

They reduce defects and technical debt

By catching issues early, effective code reviews prevent bugs from reaching production and help maintain consistent code standards, reducing the accumulation of technical debt.

They build trust and team cohesion

When done well, code reviews build mutual respect among team members and create a culture of continuous improvement.

What are the signs of problematic code review processes?

Extreme wait times

One of the most obvious red flags is excessive review delays:

"In one extreme case, we waited seven weeks for a code review. It was obviously an outlier, but it was a real situation that happened in my own development team. We were determined to fix this bottleneck."

Staff Software Engineer at Payment Processing Company

Context switching caused by review delays

When reviews take too long, developers are forced to switch tasks, leading to productivity losses:

"When your pull request is delayed, you're forced to switch tasks and lose context. Someone might be busy with meetings and unable to review until much later or even the next day. These delays are a major source of frustration for developers."

Chief API Officer at Digital Banking Software Provider

Imbalanced review distribution

When only certain team members perform reviews for specific areas, it creates bottlenecks and knowledge silos:

"A team approached me recently expressing concern that our code reviews weren't evenly distributed. People were becoming siloed in their areas of expertise, essentially becoming the designated reviewer for just that specific component."

Head of Engineering at Observability Platform

Low-quality or counterproductive feedback

Reviews that provide unhelpful criticism or nitpick minor issues rather than focusing on substantive improvements:

"I started questioning why he was doing reviews at all since his feedback was absolutely terrible."

Sr Manager at Entertainment and Media Conglomerate

Dysfunctional rules and control issues

Overcontrolled processes that emphasize rules over outcomes:

"The team developed some really ridiculous rules like 'you can't refactor code unless I say so' or 'unless I agree to it,' because there were stories about someone refactoring too much or someone else not refactoring enough..."

Engineering Manager at Digital Credit Solutions Provider

How to measure code review effectiveness?

Using the Network Perspective DevEx Survey

The survey question "Code reviews are timely and provide valuable feedback" provides a baseline measurement of how developers perceive the review process. Low scores on this question indicate that your code review process may be creating friction rather than value. Comments left by developers shall highlight specific areas for improvements.

Quantitative metrics

While survey data captures developer sentiment, it can be complemented with system data:

"We measure time metrics like average review time for pull requests or average pull request size, because these things are more measurable in practice. In my previous organization, the average review time was 4 days..."

VP of Software Engineering at Software Development Company

Common metrics include: - Time to first comment - Total review duration - Pull request size - Review distribution across team members - Approval/rejection rates

However, be careful with metrics that might not align with your actual workflow:

"Some systems count the time to first comment from when the pull request is created. However, we create the pull request at the beginning of working on a task as a draft, mainly so the pipelines can run on it. So it already exists during development, and by the time someone finishes and submits it for code review, several days might have passed. Therefore, metrics like 'time to first comment' can show 5 days, which is completely meaningless."

CTO at Online Booking Platform

Combining qualitative and quantitative data

The most insightful approach comes from combining survey results with system metrics:

"About one or two years ago, I ran an initiative to improve the code review process. We took a structured approach, running an internal survey with several iterations to gather people's opinions about the process itself. Then we started collecting raw metrics from GitHub and other sources to see how the process worked and to identify where the code review process was falling short."

Head of Engineering at Software Development Company

How can we improve code review processes?

Set clear expectations and timeframes

Establish explicit team agreements about review timeframes:

"I think that you were pointing out that people were addressing PR review times by making a decision that when someone has a PR, they'll put it in a channel and everyone will look at it within a specified timeframe, maybe X hours or so. That approach can and does work, and you'll see improvements as a result."

Head of Engineering at Observability Platform

Use automation to streamline notifications

Implement tools that remind reviewers about pending requests:

"We created Slack channels where new pull requests were automatically posted as reminders. This helped us reduce the review time to roughly one day on average."

VP of Software Engineering at Software Development Company

Reduce pull request size

Smaller pull requests lead to faster, more effective reviews:

"For example, I have an experience where one of the Android team leads simply said 'Guys, we're clearing all rules today and from now on we'll do everything promptly.' They managed to reduce the Android cycle time instantly from several days—maybe even two weeks—down to just hours. This remarkable change happened simply because they decided that these seemingly trivial things would make them approach certain topics more rigorously and with greater discipline."

Head of Engineering at Online Booking Platform

Balance review distribution

Ensure reviews are distributed across the team to prevent silos and bottlenecks:

"And sure enough, it became immediately obvious that one person was handling a huge load of reviews. The team discussed this issue, and now they're being very intentional about who reviews which PRs and are working to improve cross-training among team members."

Head of Engineering at Observability Platform

Provide training on effective review techniques

Not all developers know how to provide constructive feedback. Offering guidance on effective review practices can improve the quality of feedback.

Consider specialized tools

While GitHub and similar platforms provide basic code review functionality, specialized tools can provide insights into review patterns:

"We also use a tool that helps facilitate the review process by sending notifications and reminders when someone tags you for a pull request review on a software change. It lets you know they're waiting for your review and approval before they can merge their changes into the codebase."

Engineering Manager at Software Development Company

What are the benefits of optimizing your code review process?

Dramatically reduced cycle time

Effective code review practices can lead to significant improvements in development speed.

Higher quality code

Regular, thorough reviews catch issues earlier, resulting in fewer production defects.

Enhanced team learning

Good code reviews facilitate knowledge transfer, elevating the skills of the entire team.

Improved developer satisfaction

When reviews are timely and constructive, developers experience less friction and frustration in their work.

How to get started with code review improvements

Measure your current state

Begin by gathering data on your current process using the Network Perspective DevEx Survey question about code reviews, along with system metrics where available.

Identify bottlenecks

Look for patterns in the data, such as long wait times, uneven review distribution, or feedback quality issues.

Implement incremental improvements

Choose one or two areas to focus on initially, based on your findings: - If time to review is the issue, implement clear SLAs and notification systems - If feedback quality is lacking, provide training on effective review techniques - If reviewer availability is limited, consider more balanced distribution or dedicated review time

Re-measure and iterate

After implementing changes, measure again to see if your interventions are working, and continue refining your approach.