[ISTQB] 3.2 Review Process (K2)

Important definitions related to this process to keep in mind are:

• entry criteria: is a set of generic and specific conditions for permitting a process to go forward with a defining task. (test phase)
• formal review: like an inspection, a formal review is characterized by documented procedures and requirements. 
• informal review: is not based on any formal procedure.

Formality and modality of a review process on an agreed objective and a type of requirements are decided upon its criticality (legal or regulatory) and the maturity of the development process. 

• peer review: is a review performed by colleagues in order to identify defects and improvements.
• inspection: is a type of formal peer review that relies on visual examination of documents to detect defects.
• technical review: is a peer group discussion activity that focuses on finding and fixing defects. It is conducted by a team of peers with assigned roles.
• walkthrough: is a step-by-step presentation by the author of a document in order to gather information and to establish a common understanding of its content. 

In any review, 2 major roles are required:

• moderator/inspection leader: who will be responsible for an inspection or other review process and lead review session.
• scribe: will be responsible of recording each defect mentioned and any suggestions for process improvement during the review meeting.

LO-3.2.1 Recall the activities, roles and responsibilities of a typical formal review (K1) 
Formal review activities requires: 

• planning: This needs to be anticipated and defined beforehand: review entry/exit criteria and select the right people involved and their roles.
• setting up a kick-off meeting: which consists on informing responsibilities and roles of each people involved. It's also at this moment that documentation is distributed.
• individual preparation 
• the actual review meeting (inspection): the moderator manages how the review is organised and discussed (time, consistency). All comments are recorded in the minutes by the scribe where potential actions are also tracked.
• potential rework and follow-up: which is performed once the report has been distributed. It includes fixing defects found, recording updated status, gather metrics, checking if the defects have been addressed and if exit criteria has been met (sign-off). 

LO-3.2.2 Explain the differences between different types of reviews: informal review, technical review, walk-through and inspection (K2)

• During an informal review: comments may be ignored because there is no formal process (discussion, comments by emails between 2 people). It's an inexpensive way to get some benefits.

• During a technical review: preparation is done in advance (document, date, who will attend, venue are determined). It's a formal and planned review led by the moderator and involving the author and experts. The objective is to reach a consensus and is used for reviewing mainly specifications and test plans. It involves discussion, evaluating alternatives, finding defects, solving technical problems and check conformance to specifications and standards.

• During a walkthrough: the meeting is led step-by-step by the author of the product and the preparation is optional, so it could be an informal or formal review. The objective is mainly to gather information and is used for gaining understanding, learning and finding defects.

• Inspection is the most formal and detailed review based on a written document and led by the moderator who is never the author. It's purely achieved in order to find defects and require always both entry and exit criteria and metrics for process improvements purposes. 

Finally, a single document could be subject of one or more of these type of reviews.

LO-3.2.3 Explain the factors for successful performance of reviews (K2) 

• Appropriate people should be involved with precise roles and responsibilities (identified during planning).
• Each review have clear predefined objectives and should be perceived as a positive exercise: it is useful for making meaningful decisions, solving technical problems, evaluating solution alternatives, finding defects and checking conformance to specifications and standards.
• A moderator has to be able to manage strong personalities involved in the review, management support is highly recommended.
• The scribe has to ensure that the report is readable and understandable, the review conducted should obviously report on the document not on the author.