Capability Maturity Model Integration

Capability Maturity Model Integration

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is a process improvement approach whose goal is to help organizations improve their performance. CMMI can be used to guide process improvement across a project, a division, or an entire organization. CMMI in software engineering and organizational development is a process improvement approach that provides organizations with the essential elements for effective process improvement. CMMI is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Carnegie Mellon University.

Characteristics of the Maturity levels.

[1]

According to the Software Engineering Institute (SEI, 2008), CMMI helps "integrate traditionally separate organizational functions, set process improvement goals and priorities, provide guidance for quality processes, and provide a point of reference for appraising current processes."[2]

Overview
CMMI currently addresses three areas of interest: 1. Product and service development CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV), 2. Service establishment, management, and delivery CMMI for Services (CMMI-SVC), and 3. Product and service acquisition CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ). CMMI was developed by a group of experts from industry, government, and the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon University. CMMI models provide guidance for developing or improving processes that meet the business goals of an organization. A CMMI model may also be used as a framework for appraising the process maturity of the organization.[1] CMMI originated in software engineering but has been highly generalised over the years to embrace other areas of interest, such as the development of hardware products, the delivery of all kinds of services, and the acquisition of products and services. The word "software" does not appear in definitions of CMMI. This generalization of improvement concepts makes CMMI extremely abstract. It is not as specific to software engineering as its predecessor, the Software CMM (CMM, see below).

Capability Maturity Model Integration

History
CMMI was developed by the CMMI project, which aimed to improve the usability of maturity models by integrating many different models into one framework. The project consisted of 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. CMMI is the successor of the capability maturity model (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, and Version 1.3 in November 2010.

CMMI topics
CMMI representation
CMMI exists in two representations: continuous and staged.[1] The continuous representation is designed to allow the user to focus on the specific processes that are considered important for the organization's immediate business objectives, or those to which the organization assigns a high degree of risks. The staged representation is designed to provide a standard sequence of improvements, and can serve as a basis for comparing the maturity of different projects and organizations. The staged representation also provides for an easy migration from the SW-CMM to CMMI.[1]

CMMI model framework

Depending on the CMMI areas of interest (acquisition, services, development) used, the process areas it contains will vary. Process areas are the areas that will be covered by the organization's processes. The table below lists the process areas that are present in all CMMI areas of interest. This collection of sixteen process areas is called the CMMI core process areas.

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Core Process Areas

Abbreviation CAR CM DAR IPM MA OPD OPF OPM OPP OT PMC PP PPQA QPM REQM Name Causal Analysis and Resolution Configuration Management Decision Analysis and Resolution Integrated Project Management Measurement and Analysis Organizational Process Definition Organizational Process Focus Area Support Support Support Project Management Support Process Management Process Management Maturity Level 5 2 3 3 2 3 3 5 4 3 2 2 2 4 2

Organizational Performance Management Process Management Organizational Process Performance Organizational Training Project Monitoring and Control Project Planning Process and Product Quality Assurance Quantitative Project Management Requirements Management Process Management Process Management Project Management Project Management Support Project Management Project Management

Capability Maturity Model Integration

3
Project Management 3

RSKM

Risk Management

Maturity levels in CMMI for development

There are five maturity levels. However, maturity level ratings are awarded for levels 2 through 5. The process areas below and their maturity levels are listed for the CMMI for Development model: Maturity Level 2 - Managed CM - Configuration Management MA - Measurement and Analysis PMC - Project Monitoring and Control PP - Project Planning PPQA - Process and Product Quality Assurance REQM - Requirements Management SAM - Supplier Agreement Management

Maturity Level 3 - Defined DAR - Decision Analysis and Resolution IPM - Integrated Project Management OPD - Organizational Process Definition OPF - Organizational Process Focus OT - Organizational Training PI - Product Integration RD - Requirements Development. RSKM - Risk Management. TS - Technical Solution. VAL - Validation. VER - Verification.

Maturity Level 4 - Quantitatively Managed OPP - Organizational Process Performance QPM - Quantitative Project Management Maturity Level 5 - Optimizing CAR - Causal Analysis and Resolution OPM - Organizational Performance Management

Maturity levels in CMMI for services

The process areas below and their maturity levels are listed for the CMMI for Services model: Maturity Level 2 - Managed CM - Configuration Management MA - Measurement and Analysis PPQA - Process and Product Quality Assurance REQM - Requirements Management SAM - Supplier Agreement Management SD - Service Delivery WMC - Work Monitoring and Control WP - Work Planning

Maturity Level 3 - Defined

Capability Maturity Model Integration CAM - Capacity and Availability Management DAR - Decision Analysis and Resolution IRP - Incident Resolution and Prevention IWM - Integrated Work Management OPD - Organizational Process Definition OPF - Organizational Process Focus OT - Organizational Training RSKM - Risk Management SCON - Service Continuity SSD - Service System Development SST - Service System Transition STSM - Strategic Service Management

Maturity Level 4 - Quantitatively Managed OPP - Organizational Process Performance QWM - Quantitative Work Management Maturity Level 5 - Optimizing CAR - Causal Analysis and Resolution OPM - Organizational Performance Management

Maturity levels in CMMI for acquisition

The process areas below and their maturity levels are listed for the CMMI for Acquisition model: Maturity Level 2 - Managed AM - Agreement Management ARD - Acquisition Requirements Development CM - Configuration Management MA - Measurement and Analysis PMC - Project Monitoring and Control PP - Project Planning PPQA - Process and Product Quality Assurance REQM - Requirements Management SSAD - Solicitation and Supplier Agreement Development

Maturity Level 3 - Defined ATM - Acquisition Technical Management AVAL - Acquisition Validation AVER - Acquisition Verification DAR - Decision Analysis and Resolution IPM - Integrated Project Management OPD - Organizational Process Definition OPF - Organizational Process Focus OT - Organizational Training RSKM - Risk Management

Maturity Level 4 - Quantitatively Managed OPP - Organizational Process Performance QPM - Quantitative Project Management Maturity Level 5 - Optimizing

Capability Maturity Model Integration CAR - Causal Analysis and Resolution OPM - Organizational Performance Management

CMMI models
CMMI best practices are published in documents called models, each of which addresses a different area of interest. The current release of CMMI, version 1.3, provides models for three areas of interest: development, acquisition, and services. CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV [3]), v1.3 was released in November 2010. It addresses product and service development processes. CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ [4]), v1.3 was released in November 2010. It addresses supply chain management, acquisition, and outsourcing processes in government and industry. CMMI for Services (CMMI-SVC [5]), v1.3 was released in November 2010. It addresses guidance for delivering services within an organization and to external customers. Regardless of which model an organization chooses, CMMI best practices should be adapted by an organization according to its business objectives.

Appraisal
An organization cannot be certified in CMMI; instead, an organization is appraised. Depending on the type of appraisal, the organization can be awarded a maturity level rating (1-5) or a capability level achievement profile. Many organizations find value in measuring their progress by conducting an appraisal. Appraisals are typically conducted for one or more of the following reasons: 1. To determine how well the organizations processes compare to CMMI best practices, and to identify areas where improvement can be made 2. To inform external customers and suppliers of how well the organizations processes compare to CMMI best practices 3. To meet the contractual requirements of one or more customers Appraisals of organizations using a CMMI model[6] must conform to the requirements defined in the Appraisal Requirements for CMMI (ARC) document. There are three classes of appraisals, A, B and C, which focus on identifying improvement opportunities and comparing the organizations processes to CMMI best practices. Of these, class A appraisal is the most formal and is the only one that can result in a level rating. 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 can then be used (e.g., by a process group) to plan improvements for the organization. The Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) is an appraisal method that meets all of the ARC requirements.[7] Results of an SCAMPI appraisal may be published (if the appraised organization approves) on the CMMI Web site of the SEI: Published SCAMPI Appraisal Results [8]. SCAMPI also supports the conduct of ISO/IEC 15504, also known as SPICE (Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination), assessments etc.

Achieving CMMI compliance

The traditional approach that organizations often adopt to achieve compliance with CMMI models involves the establishment of an Engineering Process Group (EPG) and Process Action Teams (PATs)[9] This approach requires that members of the EPG and PATs be trained in the CMMI, that an informal (SCAMPI C) appraisal be performed, and that process areas be prioritized for improvement. More modern approaches that involve the deployment of commercially available, CMMI-compliant processes, can significantly reduce the time to achieve compliance. SEI

Capability Maturity Model Integration has maintained statistics on the "time to move up" for organizations adopting the earlier Software CMM and primarily using the traditional approach.[10] These statistics indicate that, since 1987, the median times to move from Level 1 to Level 2 is 23 months, and from Level 2 to Level 3 is an additional 20 months. These statistics have not been updated for the CMMI. The Software Engineering Institutes (SEI) Team Software Process methodology and the use of CMMI models can be used to raise the maturity level.

Applications
The SEI published that 60 organizations measured increases of performance in the categories of cost, schedule, productivity, quality and customer satisfaction.[11] 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 process maturity profile [12] (page 10). Of the small organizations (<25 employees), 70.5% are assessed at level 2: Managed, while 52.8% of the organizations with 10012000 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 SEI website [13]. The combination of the project management technique earned value management (EVM) with CMMI has been described (Solomon, 2002 [14]). 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.

References
[1] Sally Godfrey (2008) What is CMMI ? (http:/ / software. gsfc. nasa. gov/ docs/ What is CMMI. ppt). NASA presentation. Accessed 8 dec 2008. [2] CMMI Overview (http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ cmmi/ ). Software Engineering Institute. Accessed 16 February 2011. [3] http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ library/ abstracts/ reports/ 10tr033. cfm [4] http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ library/ abstracts/ reports/ 10tr032. cfm [5] http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ library/ abstracts/ reports/ 10tr034. cfm [6] For the latest published CMMI appraisal results see the SEI Web site (http:/ / sas. sei. cmu. edu/ pars/ ). [7] "Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPISM) A, Version 1.2: Method Definition Document" (http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ library/ abstracts/ reports/ 06hb002. cfm). CMU/SEI-2006-HB-002. Software Engineering Institute. 2006. . Retrieved 23 September 2006. [8] http:/ / sas. sei. cmu. edu/ pars/ [9] "Getting Started" (http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ cmmi/ start/ ). . Retrieved 16 February 2011. [10] "Process Maturity Profile" (http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ cmmi/ casestudies/ profiles/ cmmi. cfm). . Retrieved 16 February 2011. [11] "CMMI Performance Results of CMMI" (http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ cmmi/ research/ results/ ). . Retrieved 2006-09-23.

Capability Maturity Model Integration

[12] http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ library/ assets/ 2005sepCMMI. pdf [13] http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ cmmi/ casestudies/ mappings/ comparisons. cfm [14] http:/ / www. sei. cmu. edu/ library/ abstracts/ reports/ 02tn016. cfm

Official sources
SEI reports "CMMI for Development, Version 1.3" (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/10tr033.cfm) (pdf). CMMI-DEV (Version 1.3, November 2010). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2010. Retrieved 16 February 2011. "CMMI for Acquisition, Version 1.3" (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/10tr032.cfm) (pdf). CMMI-ACQ (Version 1.3, November 2010). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2010. Retrieved 16 February 2011. "CMMI for Services, Version 1.3" (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/10tr034.cfm) (pdf). CMMI-SVC (Version 1.3, November 2010). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2010. Retrieved 16 February 2011. "Process Maturity Profile (Current and Past Releases)" (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/casestudies/profiles/ cmmi.cfm) (PDF). CMMI for Development SCAMPI Class A Appraisal Results. Software Engineering Institute. Retrieved 16 February 2011. "Appraisal Requirements for CMMI, Version 1.2 (ARC, V1.2)" (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/ reports/06tr011.cfm) (pdf). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2006. Retrieved 16 February 2011. "Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) A Versiions 1.2: Method Definition Document" (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/06hb002.cfm) (doc). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2006. Retrieved 22 August 2006. CMMI Guidebook Acquirer Team (2007). "Understanding and Leveraging a Supplier's CMMI Efforts: A Guidebook for Acquirers" (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/07tr004.cfm) (pdf). CMU/SEI-2007-TR-004. Software Engineering Institute. Retrieved 23 August 2007. SEI Web pages "CMMI Version 1.3 Information Center" (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/tools/cmmiv1-3/). Software Engineering Institute. 2011. Retrieved 16 February 2011. "SEI Partner List" (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/partners/directory/organization/index.cfm). Software Engineering Institute. Retrieved 28 October 2006. "Optimiza formal announcment as CMMI-L3 and published on SEI website." (http://sas.sei.cmu.edu/pars/ pars_detail.aspx?a=16167). Software Engineering Institute. Retrieved 15 March 2011. SCAMPI Appraisal Results (http://sas.sei.cmu.edu/pars/pars.aspx). The complete SEI list of published SCAMPI appraisal results.

External links
Official website (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi) Capability Maturity Model Integration (http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Programming/Methodologies/ Capability_Maturity_Model/) at the Open Directory Project

Article Sources and Contributors

Article Sources and Contributors

Capability Maturity Model Integration Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=452642825 Contributors: AHB1982, Aamahdys, Akris, Alcanzar, Amit.hole123, Ash, BenFrantzDale, Bethmanj, Bigpnut, Blchrist, Brianjester, Cander0000, Carlton.northern, Cemophora, Centrx, Chowbok, Chrzastek, Cmmiloveprocess, Conan, CutOffTies, Cybercobra, Da Joe, Dan6hell66, DanielGuenther, David Biddulph, DePiep, Deceglie, Degsy99, Denisarona, Dirkbb, Discospinster, Dougluce, Dugosz, Emurphy42, Espoo, Exleon, Favonian, Feour, Flity.flea, Frap, Gaius Cornelius, Garde, Graham87, Greyskinnedboy, Gus W, Gyrofrog, Halmstad, Harriv, Hawaiian717, Hbachus, Heard tried won, Hillelglazer, Hu12, Huberthofmann, IainB, Igoldste, Intray, IvanLanin, Jamelan, Jan.derijke, Jarl Friis, JavierMC, Jeffq, John.catalano, JonnyJD, Jrdalton, Kelemendani, KentAaronJohnson, Kjetil r, Lorezsky, Lurnid, Malte Foegen, Matias.Reccius, Mdd, MendipBlue, Mjrchaos, Mortense, Murftown, NightFalcon90909, Nobunaga24, Oldgeez, On5deu, Pm master, Pne, Psoenen, Rasha Alabsi, Refins, Rfortner, Rich Farmbrough, Rikkitikki128, Rjwilmsi, Rmosler2100, Roberto999, Roesser, Rolf acker, Ronz, Ruud Koot, SEI Publications, SRyll, Sae1962, Salliesatt, Sandys2000, Sandyshrum, Saxbryn, Sc147, SilentWarrior85, Srushe, Sspecter, Steven Zhang, Tedickey, Ticaro, Tide rolls, Tomhubbard, Truthanado, Utuado, VMS Mosaic, Versus22, Walter Grlitz, Wmcrielaard, Xionbox, Xsmith, Ynottoor, Zachlipton, 261 anonymous edits

Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors

Image:Characteristics of Capability Maturity Model.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Characteristics_of_Capability_Maturity_Model.svg License: Public Domain Contributors: Sally Godfrey. Original uploader was Conan at en.wikipedia

License
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported //creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/