© 2001 hans schaefer slide no. 1 fast reviews fast reviews for small immature organizations hans...

© 2001 Hans Schaefer Slide no. 1Fast reviews

Fast reviews for small immature organizations

Hans Schaefer

Software Test Consulting

N-5281 Valestrandsfossen, Norwayhttp//:home.c2i.net/schaefer/

[email protected]

How to analyze documents and find errorsAn initial review process without bureaucracyHow to improve over time


Why this presentation

Reviews are THE most important technique to detect defects

INSPECTION is the most effective review technique.

BUT: Inspections need infrastructure and organizational maturity, which is not always given.

Here, I present a review technique to be used by immature organizations.

It does not find as many defects as inspections.

But over time, it can be developed.


Inspection process

• Two meetings• Moderator needed• Checklists available• Material meets entry

criteria• Evaluation and

improvement of the Inspection process itself

• In practice, inspection often deteriorates.


Fast Review Process

The two most important factors in inspections are:• get qualified people to attend• let them use enough time to prepare

For a faster process, I leave out the meetings and let the author control the process:

Fast review = Active Author Reader Cycle.


The Process

Author finds reviewer(s)

Overview with reviewer

Reviewer reading

Focus on important defects to find

Reviewer returns findings to author

Controlled by author, surveilled by project manager


About the process (1)

Finding reviewers:• Author chooses one or more people• Project manager makes sure there IS a review• Project manager follows up their qualification• Project manager makes sure they take the time

Project manager involved only if problems occur!


About the Process (2)

Overview with reviewer:• Author informs about risk factors• Maybe, author makes a checklist• Maybe no physical meeting, just written info



Reviewer reading:• Just like any other inspection preparation.• Problem: Not so good checklist - Try to replace

this by qualification.• Read document, find problems, describe

problems.• Project manager follows up time use.

In inspection, it is HERE you find the problems!



Feedback to author:• Written or in meeting.• Author should ask reviewer for clarification.• Reviewer signature.

• No large meeting.• No bureaucracy, no need for moderator, no ”loosing

face”.• Fast feedback• But less control with reviewers and no synergy effect.


The technique in Extreme Programming

Pair programming, testing and design

Continuous review of what is produced

Continuous active involvement of a second view

No special preparation, as questions are asked continuously.


How to improve over time

Prepare SOME checklists

Get an idea about time use

Introduce inspections where more than two reviewers needed.


Problems with author reader cycles

Lack of control:• Author may not be interested• Reader may not be qualified or have no time• Focus may be wrong (not on main risk factors)• No data between reviews• No learning of better review process


How to overcome problems

SOME project manager involvement.

Buddy system forcing everyone to participate.

Discuss major defects found too late (in testing).

Expect a minimum number of defects to be found!

A minimum education in review techniques (half day).


Review Quality Criteria

• The right (qualified) readers are chosen• They have time to read• They find at least some errors• Concentration on MAJOR issues (EDUCATE!)• Reviews are not an option• Follow up of major defects not found in reviews

Assess what you do yourself!

© 2001 hans schaefer slide no. 1 fast reviews fast reviews for small immature organizations hans...

Documents