Your team member resists code reviews. How can you convince them of its importance?

This is a common phenomenon that we face during code reviews. But getting our code reviewed actually means we're getting another developer's perspective on our code. Here's how you can see that, 1. It's not like pointing out the mistakes and judgments. No developer can write 100% efficient code and we do little mistakes. But that's fine, who won't! 2. Our code might appeals well to us, but it may convey a different meaning to others. For example, the name of the variable and methods, responsibilities of each layer, etc. 3. You can actually learn from code reviews. Doesn't matter if you review or getting reviewed, it's good. You can learn how to handle things from a different perspective in both the times.

It is extremely important to fix the Team culture. Resisting code Reviews means that either PR Creator has faced a hostile reviewer, or they are not open to changes. Set processes in your team that will ensure that its okay to accept others' suggested changes, or let a few nitpicks get checked in. Create PR Brainstorming Sessions where you discuss elaborate code change designs before the Code actually gets written ensuring that the team agrees on the set of changes, resulting in less wasted effort and time

Addressing concerns about code reviews requires a thoughtful and empathetic approach to foster understanding and collaboration within the team. Start by actively listening to the team member's concerns and validating their feelings. They may feel apprehensive about perceived criticism or worry about the time commitment involved in code reviews. Acknowledge these concerns and empathize with their perspective. Next, explain the benefits of code reviews in a constructive manner. Emphasize how code reviews can actually save time and effort in the long term by identifying potential errors early in the development process.

Code reviews aren't just about catching bugs; they're powerful learning tools. Think of them as knowledge-sharing sessions that improve everyone's code. Consistent reviews enhance code readability and maintainability, making collaboration smoother. They offer mentoring opportunities, where seasoned developers guide others. Ultimately, regular reviews fuel personal and professional growth by exposing you to diverse perspectives and best practices. Embrace them as stepping stones to becoming a stronger developer.

Some team members may resist reviews, fearing they might be seen as weak or incapable. By openly participating in code reviews and welcoming feedback yourself, you demonstrate that everyone, including leaders, can benefit from constructive criticism. In my experience, I sometimes deliberately include one or two incorrect or inefficient lines of code to gauge whether my team feels comfortable correcting me. This approach normalizes the process and reassures team members that reviews are a tool for growth, not judgment.

I believe the importance of peer review is clear, but we also recognize how time-consuming it can be, often detracting from our regular work tasks. In an ideal world, we might suggest developers set aside one hour each day for reviewing others' code, but in practice, this isn't always feasible. Encouraging team members to review specific pull requests can be more effective. For instance, having those with the most interaction or experience with the affected code conduct the review can be beneficial. Some developers may feel reserved about sharing their opinions on code. In these cases, pairing up for reviews can help them understand the team's coding standards and feel more confident in their contributions.