Code review as knowledge transfer
Developers and managers expect review to find defects, yet its observed benefits are as much about knowledge transfer, team awareness and better solutions. Understanding the change is the main challenge reviewers face.
Evidence grade: research Peer-reviewed or large-sample empirical work supports it.
Use it when
Designing review as a way of teaching; the reason review must establish understanding, especially of generated code.
Where it stops working
It is a single-company study. The proportions vary, and the structural finding holds.
Where the standard uses it
- TJ-3Code review and quality standardsIncluding standards for AI-generated code.
Sources
- Alberto Bacchelli and Christian Bird. Expectations, Outcomes, and Challenges of Modern Code Review. Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 712–721, 2013. In the bibliography
Used alongside it
- Aligned autonomy practice
- Contract at the boundary practice
- Quality as a system practice
- Review for AI-generated code practice
- Security of AI-generated code research
Cite this model
Chicago, BibTeX and licence →Engineering Management Academy. (2026). Code review as knowledge transfer. In Engineering Management Academy Body of Knowledge (Version 3.1, TEC.code-review-as-knowledge-transfer). https://www.engineeringmanagement.academy/body-of-knowledge/techniques/code-review-as-knowledge-transfer