Hi Philomena!

Thank you for your comment :) It actually made me reflect on this in the process of answering.

We kind of consolidated the peer-review process based on feedback within the team and also based on the circumstances we are in (pandemic, work from home and reduced resources).

We kept the 1o1 reviews, the frequency is set to once a sprint (either weekly or bi-weekly depending on the mission team). But these are completely up to the pair. It means that if none of them have anything to release in this sprint, then they can skip.

To have an overview, we also keep a short Design sync-up on a weekly basis where all designers from all missions are gathering and sharing the week's progress and eventual discussion items.

I found that setting an agenda even if it is optional is important to maintain the system. And the all-design sync-up is also a way for the team to check either this process is still meaningful and well applied.

As for the response from the team, it was fairly positive as they saw it as a way to share the responsibility over a release. We also kept the format pretty informal and a peer-review is usually made as short as possible. It takes more time on the product design side and to fasten the process we usually tag the reviewer on Figma before the 1o1 so that the reviewer can give all the feedback asynchronously through comments. So what happens during the 1o1 is discussing each comments. If there is a disagreement or complex question, this is the type of discussion topic that are brought during the weekly sync-up!

Hope this helps :)