I've mostly battled with 1 and 3, like they're two extremes on the spectrum. In the first instance, I suspect there is blame culture or otherwise the developer

I've mostly battled with 1 and 3, like they're two extremes on the spectrum. In the first instance, I suspect there is blame culture or otherwise the developers previously had that experience and thus carried the baggage to the new job. I believe this is how you can get pull requests that either never get approved or merged (nobody wants their name attached to it in case they get called out). When it comes to not having time to review at all, I suspect that's the classic "I'm too busy" excuse, where if the whole team is too busy working independently then they can't ever expect to get anything to production without a serious effort each time. In that instance the code review and lack of productivity is just a symptom of a lack of team dynamic. The latter point is weird because I've had that and I didn't enjoy it at all. I could never tell if the approval was because the work was good or because it was a rubber stamp operation. Especially based on other feedback it felt like I was being put on a pedestal and I hated that I could basically do no wrong, even when I did because we merged and then I had a gut feeling that I fucked something up. I'm not sure accountability would fix that particular manifestation of the problem.