Maintaining objectivity and constructiveness in software peer reviews

¶ … SRS and code systems

Criticisms from one's respected peers can often hurt more than criticisms from laypeople or new users of a software system. One assumes that one's fellow professionals can make a more reasoned, if not necessarily more objective critique. However, personal differences can enter the fray of even the most objective peer review and thus affect the constructive nature of the criticism.

To ensure objectivity, it is important that individuals address their differences with particular elements in relation to the system being reviewed, not to the person. For instance, don't say, 'you didn't do a good job on this,' speak about the system or code under critique. Specifics are key, rather than saying, 'I don't think that works,' say what the potential problems arise when the system is used and try to give a constructive, concrete solution how one could possibly reform it and make it better. "However you choose to do it, some kind of public praising and commendation seems to help build the spirit of striving for excellence that we all want in our teams," notes one developer. (Wiegers, 1994) If at all possible, for every criticism, also include one area of potential praise. Remember, "People who perceive that a risk of failure is acceptable are more willing to explore new ways to do things." An overly harsh tone about small failures can result in stifling creativity and thus long-term success and innovation. (Wiegers, 1994)