Code review isn’t just about catching bugs. It’s not just about keeping code quality high. A good code review culture is about how a team learns together. How it grows, improves collective quality, and avoids knowledge being stuck with just a few people.
If you’re leading an engineering team, you need to see this not as an isolated practice, but as a cultural system.
In this post, we’ll talk about how to build a code review culture that actually works: one that doesn’t slow down deliveries, doesn’t hurt relationships, and helps the whole team.
Start with the “why”
Before changing processes or adding new tools, it’s essential to align with the team on why you’re doing code reviews in the first place. Most devs already get that it’s important. But few stop to really think about what they want to get out of it.
Here are some clear goals that a good code review culture can bring:
- Improve code quality and consistency.
- Share knowledge among devs with different levels.
- Catch bugs or risks before production.
- Talk about architectural decisions in a lightweight and ongoing way.
- Create an environment where learning from others is part of the flow.
If your team still sees code review as “just a required step” or “a boring audit,” you’ve got a cultural problem.
Set clear standards (and share them with everyone)
Nothing creates more tension between reviewers and authors than unspoken expectations. A good starting point is to document the principles that guide the team when reviewing and submitting PRs.
This can include:
- Ideal PR size.
- What to review: logic? naming? performance? tests?
- Max time to give the first feedback.
- Who should review: subject-matter experts or anyone on the team?
The documentation doesn’t need to be a manifesto. It can be a simple Notion page. What matters is that everyone knows what to expect. Over time, this reduces anxiety and speeds things up.
Create a safe space to give and receive feedback
This is where culture is really built (or breaks). A healthy code review culture is, above all, a safe space to learn from mistakes and from each other.
That means:
- Don’t use review as a weapon: avoid passive-aggressive or condescending tones.
- Focus on the code, not the person: critique the decision, not the author.
- Highlight good practices: praise when something’s done well.
- Assume good intent: not every mistake is carelessness.
Encourage the team to ask questions instead of making absolute statements. For example: “Did you consider using X here?” instead of “This way is wrong.” That small shift completely changes the tone of the conversation.
Take care of response time and PR size
Few things are more frustrating than a PR sitting there for days waiting for review. Or a giant PR that takes an hour of deep focus just to understand.
Here are two solid practices:
- Max time for first feedback: Make it clear that everyone should get at least an initial response within 24 hours. Doesn’t have to be the final review—just something that shows the PR was seen.
- Small PRs: Encourage breaking things into smaller steps whenever possible. Smaller PRs cause less friction, are easier to review, and quicker to approve.
A useful tip: use tools (like Kodus) to help with an automatic first review. It breaks the ice and speeds up the conversation.
Don’t confuse review with gatekeeping
A common mistake is treating code review like some kind of authoritarian approval funnel. Like: “I’m the senior, so I decide what goes in.”
But that kills any sense of autonomy. Review isn’t about validating hierarchy—it’s about building together. Code review culture should be flat. Everyone should be able to review and be reviewed. The focus is always on the code and the solution—not the seniority of whoever wrote it.
If you’re a tech lead, make sure you get reviewed too. It shows that everyone’s open to learning.
Use tools that reinforce the culture (not the opposite)
Tools are part of the culture too. If you’re using GitHub, GitLab or Bitbucket with clunky flows, confusing rules, or ignored alerts—you’re creating frustration.
Pick tools that help, not ones that get in the way. Kodus, for example, automates code reviews with AI and gives consistent feedback, cutting down the time until first response. That improves the experience for junior devs and reduces overload for reviewers.
But the main point is: don’t rely only on the tool. It’s support—not a substitute for real conversations.
Train the team to review better
Code review is something you learn. And like any skill, it takes practice and feedback. If you want a strong review culture, invest in helping the team get better at it.
Suggestions:
- Run “pair review” sessions with more experienced devs.
- Do group code reviews, talking through the opinions out loud.
- Share good examples of constructive reviews.
- Give feedback on the review itself: “this suggestion was great—clear and to the point.”
This helps reduce insecurity for newer devs and raises the overall quality bar.
Leave ego at the door
Last but maybe most important: keep your ego out of the process.
Every dev who writes code knows how hard it is to detach from the solution you came up with. But that’s exactly why review exists. So a second (or third) opinion can make that code even better.
Create a culture where making mistakes is okay. Where changing your mind is a sign of maturity. And where everyone wins when the code gets better—no matter who had the original idea.
Conclusion: culture is what you do
At the end of the day, culture isn’t what you write in a doc. Culture is what you tolerate, what you reinforce, and what you do every day.
If you want a strong code review culture, start by setting the example. Give good feedback. Ask for feedback. Encourage exchange. Value those who are learning.
Over time, your team will start to see that code review is way more than just approving code. It’s about growing together.
