Review capacity planning

Review is part of factory capacity

Every proposed change creates review demand. The demand depends on change size, risk, ownership rules, specialist knowledge, and the number of revisions required. When review is treated as optional spare work, pull requests can accumulate even when implementation appears to be moving quickly.

Capacity planning should identify who can review which work, how much time is available, and what happens when the usual reviewer is unavailable. A backup reviewer can reduce a single point of failure. Smaller changes and clearer ownership can reduce the amount of time each review requires.

Measure speed and effectiveness together

Track review queue age, time to first response, time to approval, review rounds, findings, change size, and downstream rework. Faster approvals do not automatically mean better review. A capacity change is successful when it improves flow while maintaining useful feedback and quality.

Compare work types and services separately. A security-sensitive change may need specialist review, while a routine change can follow a broader path. Do not turn reviewer activity into an individual quota.

How Weave can help

Weave can show the relationship between review demand and code or delivery outcomes. Teams can inspect the pull requests behind a queue and test a focused capacity intervention with evidence from the same workflow.