Which review type is most suited for a formal process following rules and checklists?

The most suitable review type for a formal process that follows predefined rules and checklists is the inspection. Inspections are highly structured and involve a formal setting where specific roles and responsibilities are assigned to participants. The process includes adherence to rules, guidelines, and the use of checklists to ensure thoroughness in identifying defects and improving the quality of the work product being reviewed.

During an inspection, participants such as the author, reviewer, and facilitator collaborate to examine the work product in a systematic manner, which is essential for detecting issues that may not be caught through less formalized approaches. This method enhances rigor and ensures a thorough examination based on established criteria, making it ideal for situations that require a disciplined approach to quality assurance.

In contrast, other types of reviews, such as technical reviews or informal reviews, may not adhere as strictly to set rules and checklists. Technical reviews can vary in structure and may allow for a more flexible examination process, while informal reviews typically lack the formalities and documented procedures that characterize inspections. Walkthroughs also tend to be less formal, focusing more on understanding and knowledge sharing than on producing a comprehensive, defect-identifying checklist. Therefore, inspections are uniquely positioned as the most formal and rule-driven review type.