Capability Maturity Model Integration

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is a process improvement approach that provides organizations with the essential elements of effective processes. [cite web
title = What is CMMI?
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/general/index.html
accessdaymonth = 23 September
accessyear = 2006] CMMI best practices are published in documents called models, which each address a different area of interest. There are now two areas of interest covered by CMMI models: Development and Acquisition.

The current release of CMMI is Version 1.2. There are three version 1.2 models now available:

* CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV), Version 1.2 was released in August 2006. It addresses product and service development processes.

* CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ), Version 1.2 was released in November 2007. It addresses supply chain management, acquisition, and outsourcing processes in government and industry.

* CMMI for Services (CMMI-SVC), will be included in next release (January 2009). It addresses guidance for delivering services within organization and to external customers.

Regardless of which model an organization chooses, CMMI best practices should be adapted to each individual organization according to its business objectives. Organizations cannot be CMMI “certified.” Instead, an organization is appraised (e.g., using an appraisal method like SCAMPI) and is awarded a 1-5 level rating. The rating results of such an appraisal can be published if released by the appraised organization. [cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year =
url = http://sas.sei.cmu.edu/pars/
title = SCAMPI Appraisal Results
format =
work =
publisher = Software Engineering Institute
accessdaymonth = 22 August
accessyear =2007]

Process Areas

CMMI v1.2(CMMI-DEV) model contains the following 22 process areas:
* Causal Analysis and Resolution
* Configuration Management
* Decision Analysis and Resolution
* Integrated Project Management
* Measurement and Analysis
* Organizational Innovation and Deployment
* Organizational Process Definition
* Organizational Process Focus
* Organizational Process Performance
* Organizational Training
* Project Monitoring and Control
* Project Planning
* Process and Product Quality Assurance
* Product Integration
* Quantitative Project Management
* Requirements Management
* Requirements Development
* Risk Management
* Supplier Agreement Management
* Technical Solution
* Validation
* Verification

History

CMMI is the successor of the CMM or Software CMM. The CMM was developed from 1987 until 1997. In 2002, CMMI Version 1.1 was released. Version 1.2 followed in August 2006. The goal of the CMMI project is to improve the usability of maturity models by integrating many different models into one framework. It was created by members of industry, government and the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute (SEI). The main sponsors included the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the National Defense Industrial Association.

What product domains is CMMI now relevant to? Though its roots are in a scheme for software engineering, CMMI is highly generalised to embrace other kinds of product, such as the mass manufacture of electronic components. The word software does not appear in definitions of CMMI. This unification of hardware and software engineering makes CMMI extremely abstract. It is not as specific to software engineering as CMMM. Yet its usage outside of that domain appears limited.

Appraisal

Many organizations find value in measuring their progress by conducting an appraisal and earning a maturity level rating or a capability level achievement profile. These types of appraisals are typically conducted for one or more of the following reasons:

• To determine how well the organization’s processes compare to CMMI best practices and identify areas where improvement can be made
• To inform external customers and suppliers about how well the organization’s processes compare to CMMI best practices
• To meet the contractual requirements of one or more customers

Appraisals of organizations using a CMMI model must conform to the requirements defined in the Appraisal Requirements for CMMI (ARC) document. Appraisals focus on identifying improvement opportunities and comparing the organization’s processes to CMMI best practices. Appraisal teams use a CMMI model and ARC-conformant appraisal method to guide their evaluation of the organization and their reporting of conclusions. The appraisal results are used (e.g., by a process group) to plan improvements for the organization.

There are three different Classes of appraisals. They are Class A, B, and C. In the Appraisal Requirements for CMMI (ARC) document, the requirements for CMMI appraisal methods are described. [cite web
title = Appraisal Requirements for CMMI, Version 1.2
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/06.reports/06tr011.html
accessdaymonth = 23 September
accessyear = 2006 ]

The Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) is an appraisal method that meets all of the ARC requirements. There are three Classes of SCAMPI appraisals Class A, B, C. [cite web
coauthors =
year = 2006
format =
work = CMU/SEI-2006-HB-002
publisher = Software Engineering Institute
title = Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPISM) A, Version 1.2: Method Definition Document
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/06.reports/06hb002.html
accessdaymonth = 23 September
accessyear = 2006 ]

A Class A appraisal is more formal and is the only one that can result in a level rating. Results of an appraisal may be published (if the appraised organization approves) on the CMMI Web site of the SEI: [http://sas.sei.cmu.edu/pars/ Published SCAMPI Appraisal Results] . SCAMPI also supports the conduct of ISO/IEC 15504, also known as SPICE (Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination), assessments etc.

Benefits

The SEI published that 60 organizations measured [http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/results.html increases of performance] in the categories of cost, schedule, productivity, quality and customer satisfaction. [cite web
title = CMMI Performance Results, 2005
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/06.reports/06tr004.html
accessdate = 2006-09-23 ] The median increase in performance varied between 14% (customer satisfaction) and 62% (productivity). However, the CMMI model mostly deals with "what" processes should be implemented, and not so much with "how" they can be implemented. These results do not guarantee that applying CMMI will increase performance in every organization. A small company with few resources may be less likely to benefit from CMMI; this view is supported by the [http://www.sei.cmu.edu/appraisal-program/profile/pdf/CMMI/2005sepCMMI.pdf Process Maturity Profile] (page 10). Of the small organizations (<25 employees), 70.5% are assessed at level 2: Managed, while 52.8% of the organizations with 1001&ndash;2000 employees are rated at the highest level (5: Optimizing).

Interestingly, Turner & Jain (2002) argue that although it is obvious there are large differences between CMMI and agile methods, both approaches have much in common. They believe neither way is the 'right' way to develop software, but that there are phases in a project where one of the two is better suited. They suggest one should combine the different fragments of the methods into a new hybrid method. Sutherland et al (2007) assert that a combination of Scrum and CMMI brings more adaptability and predictability than either one alone. David J. Anderson (2005) gives hints on how to interpret CMMI in an agile manner. Other viewpoints about using CMMI and Agile development are available on the [http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/adoption/comparisons.html SEI Web site] .

The combination of the project management technique Earned value management (EVM) with CMMI has been described ( [http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/02.reports/02tn016.html Solomon, 2002] ). To conclude with a similar use of CMMI, Extreme Programming (XP), a software engineering method, has been evaluated with CMM/CMMI (Nawrocki et al., 2002). For example, the XP requirements management approach, (which relies on oral communication), was evaluated as not compliant with CMMI.

CMMI can be appraised using two different approaches: staged and continuous. The staged approach yields appraisal results as one of five "maturity levels". The continuous approach yields one of six "capability levels". The differences in these approaches are felt only in the appraisal; the best practices are equivalent and result in equivalent process improvement results.

CMMI Concepts

All CMMI models contain multiple process areas (PAs). A PA has 1 to 4 "goals", and each goal is comprised of "practices". These goals and practices are called "specific" goals and practices, as they describe activities that are specific to a single process area. An additional set of goals and practices applies across all of the process areas; this set is called "generic" goals and practices. Table 1 describes CMMI terminology in more detail.

Published Results of Appraisals

For the latest published CMMI appraisal results see the [http://sas.sei.cmu.edu/pars/ SEI Web site] .

Key process areas of the CMMI

(NB: this section moved from CMM, where it was irrelevant. It requires checking for relevance here in CMMI.)

The CMMI contains several key process areas indicating the aspects of product development that are to be covered by company processes.

References

Books and journals
*cite book
last = Chrissis
first = Mary Beth
authorlink =
coauthors = Konrad, Mike; Shrum, Sandy
title = CMMI: Guidelines for Process Integration and Product Improvement (2nd Edition)
publisher = Addison-Wesley Professional
date = 2006
location =
pages =
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/publications/cmmi-book-v12.html
doi =
id = ISBN 0321279670

*cite book
last = Kulpa
first = Margaret K.
authorlink =
coauthors = Kent A. Johnson
title = Interpreting the CMMI: A Process Improvement Approach
publisher = Auerbach Publications
date = 2003
location =
pages =
url =
doi =
id = ISBN 0-8493-1654-5

*cite book
last = Ahern
first = Dennis M.
authorlink =
coauthors = Armstrong, Jim; Clouse, Aaron; Ferguson, Jack; Hayes, Will; Nidiffer, Kenneth
title = CMMI SCAMPI Distilled: Appraisals for Process Improvement
publisher = Addison-Wesley Professional
date = 2005
location =
pages =
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/books/process/scampi-distilled.html
doi =
id = ISBN 0-8493-1654-5

*cite book
last = Ahern
first = Dennis M.
authorlink =
coauthors = Clouse, Aaron; Turner, Richard
title = CMMI Distilled: A Practical Introduction to Integrated Process Improvement
publisher = Addison-Wesley Professional
date = 2003
location =
pages =
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/adoption/distilled.html
doi =
id = ISBN 0-8493-1654-5

*cite journal
author=Turner, R. & Jain. A.
title=Agile Meets CMMI: Culture Clash or Common Cause?
journal=Extreme Programming and Agile Methods &ndash; XP/Agile Universe 2002
year=2002
volume=2418
issue=
pages=153&ndash;165
url=
id=ISBN 3-540-44024-0
doi=10.1007/3-540-45672-4_15

*cite journal
author=Nawrocki, J.R.; Jasinski, M.; Walter, B.; Wojciechowski, A.
title=Extreme Programming Modified: Embrace Requirements Engineering Practices
journal=Proceedings of the IEEE Joint International Conference on Requirements Engineering
year=2002
volume=
issue=
pages=3
url=
doi=10.1109/ICRE.2002.1048543

*cite journal
author=Sutherland, Jeff; Jakobsen, Carsten Ruseng; Johnson, Kent
title=Scrum and CMMI Level 5: The Magic Potion for Code Warriors
journal=Agile
publisher=IEEE Computer Society
year=2007
volume=
issue=
pages=272–278
url=http://jeffsutherland.com/scrum/Sutherland-ScrumCMMI6pages.pdf

*cite journal
author=Anderson, David J.
title=Stretching agile to fit CMMI level 3 — the story of creating MSF for CMMI process improvement at Microsoft Corporation
journal=Proceedings of the Agile Conference, Denver
year=2005
month=July
volume=
issue=
pages=
url= http://www.agilemanagement.net/Articles/Papers/StretchingAgiletoFitCMMIL.html

Websites

;"SEI web pages"

:*cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year =
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/models/
title = CMMI Model Download
format =
work =
publisher = Software Engineering Institute
accessdaymonth = 28 December
accessyear =2006

:*cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year =
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/faq/his-faq.html
title = History of CMMI
format =
work =
publisher = Software Engineering Institute
accessdaymonth = 28 October
accessyear =2006

:*cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year =
url = http://partner-directory.sei.cmu.edu
title = SEI Partner List
format =
work =
publisher = Software Engineering Institute
accessdaymonth = 28 October
accessyear = 2006

;"SEI reports"

:*cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year = 2006
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/06.reports/06tr008.html
title = CMMI for Development, Version 1.2
format = doc
work = CMMI-DEV (Version 1.2, August 2006)
publisher = Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute
accessdaymonth = 22 August
accessyear = 2007

:*cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year = 2007
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/07.reports/07tr017.html
title = CMMI for Acquisition, Version 1.2
format = doc
work = CMMI-ACQ (Version 1.2, November 2007)
publisher = Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute
accessdaymonth = 19 December
accessyear = 2007

:*cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year =
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/appraisal-program/profile/pdf/CMMI/2007marCMMI.pdf
title = Process Maturity Profile (March 2007)
format = PDF
work = CMMI v1.1 SCAMPI v1.1 Class A Appraisal Results 2006 End-Year Update
publisher = Software Engineering Institute
accessdate = 31 March
accessyear = 2007:*cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year = 2006
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/06.reports/06tr011.html
title = Appraisal Requirements for CMMI, Version 1.2 (ARC, V1.2)
format = pdf
work =
publisher =Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute
accessdaymonth = 22 August
accessyear = 2006:*cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year = 2006
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/06.reports/06hb002.html
title = Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) A Versiions 1.2: Method Definition Document
format = doc
work =
publisher = Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute
accessdaymonth = 22 August
accessyear = 2006

:*cite web
last = CMMI Guidebook Acquirer Team
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
year = 2007
url = http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/07.reports/07tr004.html
title = Understanding and Leveraging a Supplier's CMMI Efforts: A Guidebook for Acquirers
format = pdf
work = CMU/SEI-2007-TR-004
publisher = Software Engineering Institute
accessdaymonth = 23 August
accessyear = 2007

Footnotes

ee also

*Capability Maturity Model
*Process area (CMMI)
*The SPICE project
*Process improvement
*Software Engineering Institute

External links

CMMI Model

* cite web
url=http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/models/index.html
title=CMMI Models, Modules, and Reports
publisher=SEI
accessdate=2008-02-01

* [http://www.cmmi.de/ CMMI for Development v1.2 Browser] The content of the CMMI document in an easy-to-browse format

Examples

* The complete list of published SCAMPI appraisal results can be viewed here: [http://sas.sei.cmu.edu/pars/pars.aspx SCAMPI Appraisal Results] .

Organizations
* [http://www.sei.cmu.edu/ SEI] Software Engineering Institute
* [http://www.espi.org/ ESPI Foundation] European SEPG
* [http://www.ndia.org/ NDIA] National Defense Industrial Association

Conferences
* [http://www.cmminews.com/ CMMI made Practical] CMMI made Practical
* [http://www.sei.cmu.edu/sepg/ SEPG] SEPG
* [http://www.sei.cmu.edu/sepgeurope/ SEPG Europe] SEPG Europe (ESEPG)