Why Peer Reviews are More Than Just a Ritual

#insight

Why Peer Reviews are More Than Just a Ritual

In the world of software engineering, peer reviews are a critical part of the development process, ensuring that new code is clean, efficient, and bug-free before it becomes part of the main product. But what's the secret sauce that makes this system work so well? Let's break it down into three key ingredients: trunk-based development in Git repositories, the discipline of Pull Request Reviews, and the iterative learning from Retrospectives.

Git Repositories & Trunk Development

Here's the deal with Git: it's like the ultimate archive and collaboration tool rolled into one. It lets developers branch off from the main line of code development (that's the trunk) to build new features or fix bugs without messing with the main product. Automated checks and integration tests act like quality control before these changes merge back, ensuring that only the best code makes the cut.

Pull Request Reviews

Pull Requests are like checkpoints. Before any code changes make it to the main stage, they need a green light from other devs. It's not just about catching typos; it's a full-on audit for coding standards, architecture, and security. It's a filtration process that ensures only the best code makes it through.

Retrospectives & Continuous Improvement

After a sprint, developers don't just pat themselves on the back and call it a day. They huddle up and hash it out—what worked, what didn’t, and how they can fine-tune their process. This cycle of reflection and improvement keeps the machine well-oiled and always running toward better performance.

Now, let's pivot. How do these principles play out in other professions? Is there a universal 'Git' for architects or a 'Pull Request' for doctors? And what about 'Retrospectives' outside the scrum board? Let's dive in and see how different fields tackle the peer review challenge, each with their unique toolkit, but all with the same goal: making the good stuff even better.

Healthcare

  • GitHub Equivalent: Electronic Health Records (EHRs). These systems are comprehensive records that allow for a collaborative platform where multiple healthcare providers contribute and review patient information, akin to a repository of patient histories.
  • Pull Request Review: Morbidity and Mortality (M&M) Conferences. During these sessions, healthcare professionals convene to review and discuss complications or errors in patient care, equivalent to a code review for improving practice and patient outcomes.
  • Retrospective: Continuous Medical Education (CME). Healthcare professionals regularly reflect on their practice, undertake new learning, and apply it to improve their future work, much like a sprint retrospective aims to refine processes.

Film and Television

  • GitHub Equivalent: Scriptwriting Software with Collaboration Features. Teams use these platforms to draft, revise, and finalize scripts, with changes tracked and reviewed by various stakeholders.
  • Pull Request Review: Table Reads. Before the cameras roll, actors and directors go through the script together, giving and receiving feedback on the dialogue and narrative flow.
  • Retrospective: Post-Production Reviews. After the filming process, the team reviews the footage, storytelling, and audience reactions to inform future productions.

Aerospace

  • GitHub Equivalent: Simulation Software Suites. These platforms are where models of aircraft and spacecraft are built and iterated upon, with each change meticulously documented and reviewed.
  • Pull Request Review: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). This is a step-by-step approach for identifying all possible failures in a design, much like reviewing code for flaws before deployment.
  • Retrospective: Flight Review Boards. After a mission, teams reconvene to discuss what went well and what didn’t, ensuring that each launch is more successful than the last.

Special Case: Iceland crowdsourced constitution

The draft of Iceland's new constitution was a pioneering effort in participatory democracy. It began with a National Assembly where 950 randomly selected citizens discussed Iceland's core values. From a pool of 522, 25 drafters were elected, with politicians excluded! These drafters then used social media to solicit public feedback on the constitution's clauses and live-streamed their meetings. This process yielded around 4,000 comments and 400 unique suggestions from the public. This draft were approved by 67% of voters on a referendum, but the parliament never ratified it. Unfortunately, what was started as unique social "peer review" experiment was slowly destroyed by politicians that sidelined a draft of crowdsourced constitution.

Architecture and Engineering

  • GitHub Equivalent: Building Information Modeling (BIM) Software. It allows architects and engineers to work on a single project from different angles, integrating their work seamlessly like collaborative coding environments.
  • Pull Request Review: Design Critiques. Professionals present their blueprints and models for feedback, where peers assess the viability, safety, and aesthetics of a design before it's brought to life.
  • Retrospective: Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE). After a building's completion, architects and engineers review the structure's performance and user feedback to inform future projects.

Academia

  • GitHub Equivalent: Research Repositories. Online databases where scholars upload their studies, making them available for peer review and citation, functioning as a vast library of academic ‘code.’
  • Pull Request Review: Peer-Reviewed Journals. Before a study is published, it is rigorously reviewed by fellow experts who critique the methodology, analysis, and conclusions drawn, ensuring the research’s quality.
  • Retrospective: Symposiums and Conferences. Scholars often gather post-publication to discuss the implications of research findings and the lessons learned, fostering a continuous loop of knowledge enhancement.

Law

  • GitHub Equivalent: Legal Databases. Platforms like LexisNexis or Westlaw where legal professionals share and review case laws, statutes, and legal precedents, much like developers share code.
  • Pull Request Review: Moot Courts. Before heading to trial, lawyers rehearse their cases in simulated court settings, receiving feedback on their arguments and strategies.
  • Retrospective: Case Law Review. After a case concludes, legal teams often review the outcomes and the efficacy of their arguments to refine their future legal strategies.