We plan reviews to determine the focus and scope of the review, and to make sure all participants understand their
role, and the goals of the review.
Prior to the review, define the scope of the review by determining the question that will be asked; define what will be
assessed and why? See the Checklist for the work products to be reviewed for the types of questions that could be
asked. The exact questions will depend on the phase in the project: earlier reviews will be concerned with broader
architectural issues, later reviews will be more specific.
Once the scope of the review has been determined, define the review participants, the agenda, the information that will
be required to perform the review. In selecting the participants, establish balance between software architecture
expertise and domain expertise. Clearly and unambiguously designate an assessment leader who will coordinate the
review. If necessary, draw upon other teams or other parts of the organization to supply domain or technical expertise.
The number of reviewers should be approximately seven or less. If chosen appropriately, they will be more than capable
of identifying problems in the architecture. More reviewers actually reduce the quality of the review by making the
meetings longer, making participation more difficult, and by injecting side issues and discussion into the review.
Fewer than 4 reviewers increases the risk of review myopia, as the diversity of concerns is reduced.
Reviewers should be experienced in the area to be reviewed; for use cases, reviewers should have an understanding of
the problem domain; for software architecture a knowledge of software design techniques is also needed. Inexperienced
reviewers may learn something about the architecture by participating, but they will contribute little to the review
and their presence may be distracting. Keep the group small; no more than seven people and no fewer than three. Fewer
reviewers jeopardize the quality of the review, and more reviewers prevent interactive discussion essential to
achieving quality results.
Select reviewers appropriate for the material:
-
those who have the background to understand the material presented
-
those who have an active stake in the quality of product or work product being reviewed
Prior to the review, the work products to be reviewed and any background material should be gathered and distributed to
the review participants. This must be done sufficiently in advance of the review meeting for reviewers to review the
material and gather issues. Distributing review materials sufficiently in advance, and allowing reviewers to have time
to prepare for the review significantly improves the quality of review results. Preparation for reviews also greatly
improves the efficiency and effectiveness of the review.
Reviewers should study the documentation, forming questions and identifying issues to discuss, prior to the
review. Given normal workload of reviewers, a few working days is usually the minimum time needed to prepare for
the review.
|