Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon Universityitq.ch/pdf/sepg/Phillips_101c_1.pdf · Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University ... CMMI Adoption Trends:
Post on 04-Jun-2018
220 Views
Preview:
Transcript
page 1
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
CMMI® Version 1.2 and Beyond
E-SEPGJune 12, 2006
Mike PhillipsSoftware Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon University
® CMMI is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Carnegie Mellon University.Thanks to Gary Wolf and D’Ann Hunt from Raytheon, Denise Cattan of SPIRULA
page 2
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
CMMI Today
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 3
CMMI Adoption Trends: Website Visits1CMMI web pages hits
12K/day
443 organizations visited the CMMI Website more than200 times during September 2005:
29 Defense contractor organizations
12 DoD organizations
49 Universities
328 Commercial companies
25 Non-DoD government agencies
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 4
CMMI Adoption Trends: Website Visits2
The following werethe top viewed pageson the CMMI Websitein September 2005:
•CMMI Main Page
•What is CMMI?
•CMMI Models andModules
•Getting Startedwith CMMIAdoption
•CMMI Training,Events, & Forums
Average daily page views per quarter
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
2002
2003
2004
2005
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 5
TrainingIntroduction to CMMI –47,933 trainedIntermediate CMMI –2,026 trainedIntroduction to CMMI Instructors –414SCAMPI Lead Appraisers –612 trainedSCAMPI B&C-Only Team Lead -- 27
AuthorizedIntroduction to CMMI V1.1 Instructors –355SCAMPI V1.1 Lead Appraisers –419SCAMPI B&C Team Leads -- 409
CMMI Transition Status –3/31/06
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 6
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 YTD2006
Intro to the CMM and CMMI Attendees(Cumulative)
CMM Intro (discon'td.12/31/05)
CMMI Intro
CMMI Intermediate
3-31-06
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 7
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Number of SCAMPI vX Class A Appraisals Conducted by Year by ModelRepresentation*
Reported as of 31 January 2006*Where Representation is reported
Staged
Continuous
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 8
Appraisal Results Summary1,264 appraisals have been reported since the April 2002SCAMPI Class A Version 1.1 release.
Commercial/In-House organizations reporting appraisals isincreasing more rapidly than other organizational categories.
Government/Military and Government/Military Contractorsreporting appraisals is increasing at a stable and consistentrate.
The highest percentage of Commercial/In-House organizationsreporting appraisals is from outside the USA.
Comparing early reports of the SW-CMM maturity profile withearly CMMI data reflects a more mature CMMI profile.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 9
Current Appraisal SynopsisBased on SCAMPISM V1.1 Class A appraisals conducted sinceApril 2002 through December 2005 and reported to the SEI byJanuary 2006.
1,264 appraisals1,106 organizations
644 participating companies130 reappraised organizations
4,771 projects62.0% non-USA organizations
Organizations previously appraised against CMMI V1.0 and who have notreappraised against V1.1 are not included in this report
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 10
Number of Appraisals Conducted by YearReported as of 31 March 2006
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
SPA CBAIPI(Discontinued after 12/31/2005) SCAMPI vX ClassA3
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 11
Number of SCAMPI v1.1 Class A Appraisals Conducted by QuarterReported as of 28 February 2006
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
Q2/02 Q3/02 Q4/02 Q1/03 Q2/03 Q3/03 Q4/03 Q1/04 Q2/04 Q3/04 Q4/04 Q1/05 Q2/05 Q3/05 Q4/05
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 12
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Military/GovernmentAgency
Contractor forMilitary/Government
Commercial/In-house
Number of Organizations
Based on 878 organizations
Reporting Organizational Types
9/30/05
64.0%
31.3%
4.7%
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 13
Based on organizations reporting size data
25 or fewer9.9%
101 to 20018.9%201 to 300
11.0%
76 to 1008.7%
51 to 7510.3%
26 to 5012.7%
301 to 5009.8%
501 to 10009.1%
1001 to 20006.3% 2000+
3.3%
Organization SizeBased on the total number of employees within the area of the organizationthat was appraised
1,083
1 to 10041.6%
201 to 2000+39.5%
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 14
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Not Given Initial Managed Defined QuantitativelyManaged
Optimizing
USA: 100 % = 420
Non-USA: 100 % = 686
Based on USA organizations and Non-USA organizations
%o
fO
rgan
izat
ion
sMaturity Profile by All ReportingUSA and Non-USA Organizations
686420
125
8
63
3912
213 239
42
141
151
12
61
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 15
Countries where Appraisals have beenPerformed and Reported to the SEI
Red country name: New additions since October 2005
Argentina Australia Austria Belarus Belgium Brazil CanadaChile China Colombia Czech Republic Denmark Egypt FinlandFrance Germany Hong Kong India Ireland Israel ItalyJapan Korea, Republic of Latvia Malaysia Mauritius Mexico NetherlandsNew Zealand Philippines Portugal Russia Singapore Slovakia South AfricaSpain Sweden Switzerland Taiwan Thailand Turkey UkraineUnited Kingdom United States Vietnam
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 16
Appraisals and Maturity Levels by Country
CountryNumber ofAppraisals
MaturityLevel 1
Reported
MaturityLevel 2
Reported
MaturityLevel 3
Reported
MaturityLevel 4
Reported
MaturityLevel 5
Reported CountryNumber ofAppraisals
MaturityLevel 1
Reported
MaturityLevel 2
Reported
MaturityLevel 3
Reported
MaturityLevel 4
Reported
MaturityLevel 5
Reported
Argentina 12 No Yes Yes Yes No Latvia 10 or fewerAustralia 21 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Malaysia 10 or fewerAustria 10 or fewer Mauritius 10 or fewerBelarus 10 or fewer Mexico 10 or fewerBelgium 10 or fewer Netherlands 10 or fewerBrazil 22 No Yes Yes No Yes New Zealand 10 or fewerCanada 15 No Yes Yes No Yes Philippines 10Chile 10 or fewer Portugal 10 or fewerChina 117 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Russia 10 or fewerColombia 10 or fewer Singapore 10 or fewerCzech Republic 10 or fewer Slovakia 10 or fewerDenmark 10 or fewer South Africa 10 or fewerEgypt 10 or fewer Spain 18 No Yes Yes No YesFinland 10 or fewer Sweden 10 or fewerFrance 42 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Switzerland 10 or fewerGermany 22 Yes Yes Yes No Yes Taiwan 26 No Yes Yes No NoHong Kong 10 or fewer Thailand 10 or fewerIndia 140 No Yes Yes Yes Yes Turkey 10 or fewerIreland 10 or fewer Ukraine 10 or fewerIsrael 10 or fewer United Kingdom 35 Yes Yes Yes Yes NoItaly 10 or fewer United States 500 Yes Yes Yes Yes YesJapan 131 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vietnam 10 or fewerKorea, Republic of 50 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 17
Disciplines Selected forAppraisals
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
SE
/SW
SW
SE
/SW
/SS
SE
/SW
/IPP
D/S
S
SE
SE
/SW
/IPP
D
SW
/IPP
D
SW
/SS
SE
/SS
SE
/IPP
D/S
S
SW
/IPP
D/S
S
49.8%
Based on 977 appraisals reporting coverage
Nu
mb
ero
fA
pp
rais
als
34.5%
3.0% 1.8% 1.2% 0.5% 0.2%
4.6% 4.1%
0.1% 0.1%
9/30/05
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 18
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Not Given Initial Managed Defined QuantitativelyManaged
Optimizing
Based on most recent appraisal of 878 organizations
Maturity Profileby All Reporting Organizations
Nu
mb
erO
fA
pp
rais
als
11.7%
4.7%
31.7%
25.2%
4.7%
22.1%
9/30/05
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 19
Three Classes of Appraisals
LargeMediumSmallTeam Size
HighMediumLowResource needs
YesNoNoRatings generated
HighMediumLowAmount of objective evidence
Class AClass BClass CCharacteristic
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 20
SCAMPI Family
SCAMPI C: provides a wide range ofoptions, including characterization of plannedapproaches to process implementationaccording to a scale defined by the user
SCAMPI B: provides options in model scopeand organizational scope, but characterizationof practices is fixed to one scale and isperformed on implemented practices
SCAMPI A: Is the most rigorous method, andis the only method that can result in ratings
breadth of tailoring
C
A
Bdepth of
investigation
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 21
Approach, Deployment, Institutionalization
C
B
A
InstitutionalizationDeploymentApproach
•SCAMPI family methods can be used in a range from:•looking at the approach planned to satisfy processimprovement goals to•examining deployment of processes in selected instances inan organizational unit (OU) to•benchmarking the institutionalization of CMMI in an OU
Reliability, rigor and cost may go down from A to B to C,risk may go up
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 22
Combined Appraisal Opportunities
Current ISO 9001
ISO 9001ISO 9001IAIA
Current CMMI
SCAMPISCAMPI‘‘AA’’
SCAMPI ‘A’&
ISO 9001
SCAMPI ‘A’
VisitReport
Rating letterindicating level
achieved
… continues todemonstrate
compliance withISO 9001:2000
…no behavioursinconsistent with
operating at level X
(Combined ISO Surveillanceusing Cat ‘C’appraisal)
(Cat ‘C’appraisal)
Rating letter & or certificatewith scope indicating
“… in accordance with Level X”
The possible options for assessment and surveillance
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 23
Adoption: What Else Is Happening?The Addison-Wesley SEI Series Book and:•A Guide to the CMMI•CMMI: A Framework…•CMMI Assessments•CMMI Distilled: Second Edition•CMMI SCAMPI Distilled•CMMI: Un Itinéraire Fléché•De kleine CMMI•Interpreting the CMMI•Making Process Improvement Work•Practical Insight into CMMI•Real Process Improvement Using the CMMI•Systematic Process Improvement Using ISO
9001:2000 and CMMI•Balancing Agility and Discipline
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 24
How about SEI Publications?
Technical notes and special reports:•Interpretive Guidance Project (Two Reports)•CMMI and Product Line Practices•CMMI and Earned Value Management•Interpreting CMMI for Operational Organizations•Interpreting CMMI for COTS Based Systems•Interpreting CMMI for Service Organizations•CMMI Acquisition Module (CMMI-AM) (V1.1)•CMMI and Six Sigma•Interpreting CMMI for Marketing (in progress)•Demonstrating the Impact and Benefits of CMMI (and
web pages –www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/results)
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 25
Performance Results Summary
27.7 :12 : 1144.8 : 1Return on
Investment
55%-4%614%CustomerSatisfaction
132%29%1850%Quality
255%11%1667%Productivity
90%2%1937%Schedule
87%3%2120%Cost
HighLow
# ofdata
pointsMedia
nImprovements
•N = 24, as of 9 November 2005•Organizations with results expressed as change over time
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 26
CMMI Today
Version 1.1 CMMI Product Suite was released January2002.
•CMMI Web site visits average 12,000/day
•Almost 50,000 people have been trained
•Over 1500 “class A”appraisals have been reportedto the SEI
Now we want to continuously improve…
page 27
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
CMMI V1.2…and Beyond
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 28
Version 1.2 Changes1•Eliminate concept of advanced practices and common
features from text
•Combine ISM with SAM; eliminate supplier sourcing(SS) designation
•Add hardware amplifications
•Recognize, given hardware additions, that providingseparate development models no longer useful- “single book”approach (CMMI-DEV+IPPD)
•“Not applicable”process areas (PAs) for maturity levelswill be significantly constrained (SAM, IPPD)
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 29
Version 1.2 Changes2•Clarify material based on 1000+ Change Requests
(e.g., improve high maturity verbiage, appraisalterminology)
•Two work environment specific practices added:
- one to OPD for organizational look
- One to IPM for project specifics
•Glossary improved (e.g., higher level management,bidirectional traceability, subprocess)
•Overview text improved
•IPPD coverage consolidated and simplified
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 30
Integrated Product and ProcessDevelopment (IPPD) ChangesIPPD material is being revised significantly.•Organization Environment for Integration PA removed
and material moved to Organizational ProcessDefinition (OPD) PA.
•Integrated Teaming PA removed and material moved toIntegrated Project Management (IPM) PA.
•IPPD goals have been consolidated.
- “Enable IPPD Management”in OPD- “Apply IPPD Principles”in IPM
•Overall material condensed and revised to be moreconsistent with other PAs.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 31
Supplier Agreement Management
Specific Goal
Establish SupplierAgreements
Specific Practice
1.1 –Determine Acquisition Type1.2 –Select Suppliers1.3 –Establish Supplier Agreements
Satisfy SupplierAgreements
2.1 –Execute the Supplier Agreement2.2 –Monitor Selected Supplier
Processes2.3 –Evaluate Selected Supplier Work
Products2.4 –Accept the Acquired Product2.5 –Transition Products
v1.1 SP2.1 “Review COTS Products,”was eliminated. “Identifycandidate COTS products that satisfy requirements”is a newsubpractice under the Technical Solutions Process Area SP1.1,“Develop Alternative Solutions and Selection Criteria.”
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 32
CMMI Model Combinations
CMMI Core
SERelated
Examples
Integrated Product andProcess Development
SupplierSourcing
SWRelated
Examples
V 1.1
CMMI Core (now includes SS)
SERelated
Examples
IPPD
SWRelated
Examples
HWRelated
Examples
V 1.2
Organizational Goal(OPD)
Project Goal (IPM)
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 33
Su
pp
ort
PA
sP
roce
ssM
gt
PA
s
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
PA
s
IPM
IPPD Changes
SG1
SG2
SG3
SG4
IPM
SG1
SG2
SG3
IT
SG1
SG2
SG3 = ApplyIPPD principles
OE
I SG1
SG2
OP
DSG1
SG2 SG2 = EnableIPPD principles
V1.1 V1.2
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 34
SCAMPI A Changes Being Consideredfor V1.2Method implementation clarifications•interviews in “virtual”organizations•practice characterization rules•organizational unit sampling options
Appraisal Disclosure Statement (ADS) improvements•reduce redundancy with other appraisal documents•improve usability for sponsor and government•require sponsor’s signature on the ADS
Appraisal team will have responsibility for determination of“applicability”for SAM
Maturity level and capability level shelf life –3 years, given1 year of V1.2 availability
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 35
Published Appraisal Results
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 36
CMMI Training v1.2Introduction to CMMI (Staged and Continuous)•editorial update released 9/05•will be updated for v1.2
Intermediate Concepts of CMMI•will be updated for v1.2•will better prepare students for SCAMPI training
CMMI Instructor Training•updated earlier this year to reflect “combined”
Introduction to CMMI course•will be updated to reflect v1.2 changes
“Delta”training from V1.1 to V1.2•under development
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 37
Beyond V1.21
Improved architecture will allow post-V1.2 expansion.
•Extensions of the life cycle (Services,Outsourcing/Acquisition) could expand use of acommon organizational framework:
- allows coverage of more of the enterprise orpotential partnering organizations
- adapts model features to fit non-developmentalefforts (e.g., CMMI Services, CMMI Acquisition)
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 38
CMMI Framework
Shared CMMI MaterialSpecific Practices, Additions, Amplifications
DevelopmentSpecific Materials
AcquisitionSpecific Materials
ServicesSpecific Materials
•Development Amplifications•Development Additions
•PA XX•PA ZZ•PA DEV
•Services Amplifications•Services Additions
•PA ZZ•PA YY•PA SRV
•Acquisition Amplifications•Acquisition Addition
•PA YY•PA XX•PA ACQ
Architecture & Constellations
Core Foundation ModelCommon PAs, Specific Practices, Generic Practices
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 39
Beyond V1.22
First two new “constellations,”CMMI for Services andCMMI for Acquisition, have been “commissioned”byCMMI Steering Group. Development will be in parallel withV1.2 effort; publication sequenced after V1.2 rollout.
Northrop-Grumman is leading industry group for CMMIServices.
•Initial focus will be for organizations providing “DoDservices”as well as internal IT:
- System maintenance
- Network Management, IT Services
- IV&V
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 40
Beyond V1.23
SEI is coordinating development of CMMI-ACQ.
•Will build upon General Motors IT Sourcing expansion
•Will add government perspectives from both DoD andcivil agencies
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 41
Planned Sequence of Models
SA-CMMSA-CMM
GM ITSourcing
GM ITSourcing
CMMI-DEV V1.2CMMI-DEV V1.2
CMMI-ACQCMMI-ACQ
CMMI-SVCCMMI-SVC
CMMI V1.1CMMI V1.1
CMMI-AMCMMI-AM
page 42
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
CMMI V1.2…and Beyond…the details
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 43
The StepsA long-term strategy and the upgrade criteria approved bythe Steering Group.
Change Requests reviewed to identify possible ChangePackages (CP) for a V1.2 of model, training, and/ormethod.
CCBs determined which CPs would be accepted.
Implementation Packages developed to create a “beta”forpiloting (model and training)
Model piloting was conducted Dec05-Feb06; trainingJun06.
V1.2, incorporating piloting feedback, will be released inFY 06. Model will be first, in Aug06
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 44
CCB Membership (for content changes)
Shane Atkinson CMMI PartnerRoger Bate SEITom Bernard USAFRhonda Brown SEIMary Beth Chrissis SEIPaul Croll CSCStephen Gristock JP Morgan ChaseRick Hefner Northrop GrummanNils Jacobsen MotorolaMike Konrad SEILarry Osiecki USArmyBill Peterson SEIMike Phillips SEIBob Rassa RaytheonKaren Richter OSDMillee Sapp USAFWarren Schwomeyer Lockheed MartinBill Schoening Boeing & INCOSESandy Shrum SEIKatie Smith USNavyGary Wolf Raytheon
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 45
The Model Baseline for V1.2
Textbook:
CMMI: Guidelines forProcess Integration andProduct Improvement
Continuing the “Single model,single course”strategy
V1.2 release will be as aTechnical Report
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 46
Major Themes
Reduce size/complexity
Increase coverage
•in existing elements
•discipline additions
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 47
Reduce size and complexity
Single Technical Report, not 8 as in V1.1Common features and advanced practice
distinctions eliminatedTwo process areas consolidated into other PA’sOne “addition”or “discipline,”Supplier
Sourcing, eliminated as a separable “model.”Discipline distinctions reduced in amplifications
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 48
CMMI Model Combinations
CMMI Core
SERelated
Examples
Integrated Product andProcess Development
SupplierSourcing
SWRelated
Examples
V 1.1
CMMI Core (now includes SS)
SERelated
Examples
IPPD
SWRelated
Examples
HardwareRelated
Examples
V 1.2
Organizational Goal(OPD)
Project Goal (IPM)
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 49
Example Hardware Amplification
Technical Solution
SP 2.1 Design the Product or Product ComponentDevelop a design for the product or product component.
For Hardware EngineeringDetailed design is focused on product development of electronic,mechanical, electro-optical, and other hardware products andtheir components. Electrical schematics and interconnectiondiagrams are developed, mechanical and optical assemblymodels are generated, and fabrication and assembly processesare developed.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 50
Version 1.2 Changes
Amplifications improved
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 51
Amplifications ImprovedProposed Conceptual Solution: “Review amplifications andwhere appropriate modify the amplification to provide moreinsight into the discipline that is being described. For informationthat applies more generally and is captured as an amplification,move the information into a "note" rather than identifying it as anamplification.”
From Technical Solution V1.1
For Systems EngineeringExamples of criteria include the following:
- Maintainability- Reliability- Safety
Amplification removed from Technical Solution V1.2 sinceit is not unique to Systems Engineering
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 52
Version 1.2 Changes
Common features and advanced practiceseliminated
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 53
CMMI Model Structure (V1.1)
Process Area 1
Commitmentto Perform
Abilityto Perform
DirectingImplementation
VerifyingImplementation
GenericPractices
Common Features
Staged
Maturity Levels
SpecificPractices
GenericGoals
SpecificGoals
Process Area 2 Process Area n
Continuous
SpecificGoals
Capability Levels
GenericPractices
SpecificPractices
GenericGoals
Process Area 1 Process Area 2 Process Area n
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 54
CMMI Model Structure (V1.2)
Process Area 1
GenericPractices
Staged
Maturity Levels
SpecificPractices
GenericGoals
SpecificGoals
Process Area 2 Process Area n
Continuous
SpecificGoals
Capability Levels
GenericPractices
SpecificPractices
GenericGoals
Process Area 1 Process Area 2 Process Area n
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 55
Requirements Management
Specific Goal
Manage Requirements
Specific Practice
1.1 –Obtain an Understanding ofRequirements
1.2 –Obtain Commitment toRequirements
1.3 –Manage Requirements Changes1.4 –Maintain Bidirectional Traceability
of Requirements1.5 –Identify Inconsistencies Between
Project Work and Requirements
v1.2 SP 1.4 practice statement now reads, “Maintain bidirectionaltraceability among the requirements and work products.”Project plansare no longer mentioned in this SP statement.Bidirectional Traceability description is improved in the notes andGlossary.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 56
Requirements Development -1
Specific Goal
Develop CustomerRequirements
Specific Practice
1.1 –Elicit Needs1.2 –Develop the Customer
Requirements
2.1 –Establish Product and Product-Component Requirements
2.2 –Allocate Product-ComponentRequirements
2.3 –Identify Interface Requirements
Develop ProductRequirements
Base practice “Collect Stakeholder Needs”is eliminated.Informative materials are added to SP1.1 to address standards andpolicies.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 57
Requirements Development -2
Specific Goal
Analyze and ValidateRequirements
Specific Practice
3.1 –Establish Operational Conceptsand Scenarios
3.2 –Establish a Definition of RequiredFunctionality
3.3 –Analyze Requirements3.4 –Analyze Requirements to Achieve
Balance3.5 –Validate Requirements with
Comprehensive Methods
“Evolve Operational Concepts and Scenarios”(from TS SP1.2 in v1.1)is now part of SP 3.1.The base practice “Validate Requirements”has been eliminated.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 58
Technical Solutions -1
Specific Goal
Select Product-Component Solutions
Specific Practice
1.1 –Develop Detailed Alternative Solutionsand Selection Criteria
1.2 –Select Product-Component Solutions
v1.1 SP 1.1 “Evolve Operational Concepts and Scenarios”is now partof RD SP 3.1.Base practice “Develop Alternative Solutions and Selection Criteria”is eliminated.“Identify candidate COTS products that satisfy requirements”is a newsubpractice under SP1.1.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 59
Technical Solutions -2
Specific Goal
Develop the Design
Specific Practice
2.1 –Design the Product or Product Component2.2 –Establish a Technical Data Package2.3 –Design Interfaces Using Criteria2.4 –Perform Make, Buy, or Reuse Analyses
Implement theProduct Design
3.1 –Implement the Design3.2 –Develop Product Support Documentation
Base practice “Establish Interface Descriptions”is eliminated.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 60
Product Integration -1
Specific Goal
Prepare forProduct Integration
Specific Practice
1.1 –Determine IntegrationSequence
1.2 –Establish the ProductIntegration Environment
1.3 –Establish Product IntegrationProcedures and Criteria
2.1 –Review Interface Descriptionsfor Completeness
2.2 –Manage Interfaces
Ensure InterfaceCompatibility
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 61
Product Integration -2
Specific Goal
Assemble Product Componentsand Deliver the Product
Specific Practice
3.1 –Confirm Readiness ofProduct Components forIntegration
3.2 –Assemble ProductComponents
3.3 –Evaluate Assembled ProductComponents
3.4 –Package and Deliver theProduct or Product Component
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 62
Verification -1
Specific Goal
Prepare for Verification
Specific Practice
1.1 –Select Work Products forVerification
1.2 –Establish the VerificationEnvironment
1.3 –Establish Verification Proceduresand Criteria
Perform Peer Reviews 2.1 –Prepare for Peer Reviews2.2 –Conduct Peer Reviews2.3 –Analyze Peer Review Data
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 63
Verification -2
Specific Goal
Verify Selected WorkProducts
Specific Practice
3.1 –Perform Verification3.2 –Analyze Verification Results and
Identify Corrective Action
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 64
Validation
Specific GoalPrepare for Validation
Specific Practice1.1 –Select Products for Validation1.2 –Establish the Validation Environment1.3 –Establish Validation Procedures and
Criteria
Validate Product orProduct Components
2.1 –Perform Validation2.2 –Analyze Validation Results
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 65
Version 1.2 Addition –WorkEnvironment CoverageWork Environment material added to OPD and
IPM
•OPD, SP 1.6: Establish Work EnvironmentStandards
•IPM, SP 1.3: Establish the Project’s WorkEnvironment
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 66
Integrated Product and ProcessDevelopment (IPPD) ChangesIPPD material is being revised significantly•Organization Environment for Integration PA removed
and material moved to Organizational ProcessDefinition (OPD) PA
•Integrated Teaming PA removed and material moved toIntegrated Project Management (IPM) PA
•IPPD goals in the IPM PA have been consolidated- Goal 3: Apply IPPD Principles
•Overall material condensed and revised to be moreconsistent with other PAs
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 67
Su
pp
ort
PA
sP
roce
ssM
gt
PA
s
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
PA
s
IPM
IPPD Changes
SG1
SG2
SG3
SG4
IPM
SG1
SG2
SG3
IT
SG1
SG2
SG3 = ApplyIPPD principles
OE
I SG1
SG2
OP
DSG1
SG2 SG2 = EnableIPPD principles
V1.1 V1.2
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 68
Organizational Process Definition
V1.1
SG 1 –Establish OrganizationalProcess Assets1.1 –Establish Standard Processes1.2 –Establish Life-Cycle ModelDescriptions1.3 –Establish Tailoring Criteria andGuidelines1.4 –Establish the Organization’sMeasurement Repository1.5 –Establish the Organization’s Process
SG1 –Establish Organizational Process Assets
1.1 –Establish Standard Processes1.2 –Establish Life-Cycle Model Descriptions1.3 –Establish Tailoring Criteria and Guidelines1.4 –Establish the Organization’s Measurement
Repository1.5 –Establish the Organization’s Process1.6 –Establish Work Environment StandardsSG2 –Enable IPPD Management2.1 –Establish Empowerment Mechanisms2.2 –Establish Rules and Guidelines for
Integrated Teams2.3 –Establish Guidelines to Balance Team and
Home Organization Responsibilities
V1.2
New
Consolidatedfrom V1.1 OEI PA
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 69
Organizational Process Definition -1
Specific Goal
Establish OrganizationalProcess Assets
Specific Practice
1.1 –Establish Standard Processes1.2 –Establish Life-Cycle Model
Descriptions1.3 –Establish Tailoring Criteria and
Guidelines1.4 –Establish the Organization’s
Measurement Repository1.5 –Establish the Organization’s Process
Asset Library1.6 –Establish Work Environment
Standards
New
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 70
Organizational Process Definition -2
IPPD Specific Goal
Enable IPPD Management
Specific Practice
2.1 –Establish EmpowermentMechanisms
2.2 –Establish Rules and Guidelines forIntegrated Teams
2.3 –Establish Guidelines to BalanceTeam and Home OrganizationResponsibilities
NOTE: This Specific Goal and its associated Specific Practices arepart of IPPD Addition.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 71
Integrated Project Management -1
V1.1
SG1 –Use the Project’s Defined Process1.1 –Establish the Project’s DefinedProcess1.2 –Use Organizational Process Assetsfor Planning Project Activities1.3 –Integrate Plans1.4 –Manage the Project Using theIntegrated Plans1.5 - Contribute to the OrganizationalProcess AssetsSG2 –Coordinate and Collaborate withRelevant Stakeholder2.1 –Manage Stakeholder Involvement2.2 –Manage Dependencies2.3 –Resolve Coordination Issues
SG1 –Use the Project’s Defined Process1.1 –Establish the Project’s Defined Process1.2 –Use Organizational Process Assets for
Planning Project Activities1.3 –Establish the Project’s Work Environment1.4 –Integrate Plans1.5 –Manage the Project Using the Integrated
Plans1.6 - Contribute to the Organizational
Process AssetsSG2 –Coordinate and Collaborate with Relevant
Stakeholder2.1 –Manage Stakeholder Involvement2.2 –Manage Dependencies2.3 –Resolve Coordination Issues
V1.2
New
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 72
Integrated Project Management -2
SG3 –Apply IPPD Principles3.1 –Establish the Project’s Shared Vision3.2 –Establish Integrated Team Structure for the
Project3.3 –Allocate Requirements to Integrated Teams3.4 –Establish Integrated Teams3.5 –Establish Coordination among Interfacing
Teams
V1.1
SG 3 –Use the Project’s Shared Vision forIPPD3.1 –Define the Project’s Shared VisionContext3.2 –Establish the Project’s Shared VisionSG 4 –Organize Integrated Teams for IPPD4.1 –Determine Integrated Team Structurefor the Project4.2 –Develop Preliminary Distribution ofRequirements to Integrated Teams4.3 –Establish Integrated Teams
V1.2
Consolidated fromV1.1 Integrated
Teaming PA
Consolidatedfrom V1.1 IPM PA
SG3 and SG4
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 73
Integrated Project Management -1
Specific Goal
Use the Project’sDefined Process
Specific Practice
1.1 –Establish the Project’s DefinedProcess
1.2 –Use Organizational Process Assetsfor Planning Project Activities
1.3 –Establish the Project’s WorkEnvironment
1.4 –Integrate Plans1.5 –Manage the Project Using the
Integrated Plans1.6 - Contribute to the Organizational
Process Assets
.
New
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 74
Integrated Project Management -2Specific Goal
Coordinate andCollaborate withRelevant Stakeholder
Specific Practice
2.1 –Manage Stakeholder Involvement2.2 –Manage Dependencies2.3 –Resolve Coordination Issues
Apply IPPD Principles 3.1 –Establish the Project’s SharedVision
3.2 –Establish Integrated TeamStructure for the Project
3.3 –Allocate Requirements toIntegrated Teams
3.4 –Establish Integrated Teams3.5 Establish Coordination among
Interfacing Teams
The Specific Goal, “Apply IPPD Principles,”and the associatedSpecific Practices are part of IPPD Addition.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 75
OEI SG1 …CMMI V1.1•OEI SG1 Provide IPPD
Infrastructure
-SP 1.1 Establish theOrganization’s Shared Vision
-SP 1.2 Establish an IntegratedWork Environment
-SP 13. Identify IPPD-uniqueSkill Requirements
CMMI V1.2–OPD SG1 and IPM SG1
•IPM SP 3.1 Establish the Project’sShared visionNone of the OEI material was usedin this existing SP. CMMI V1.2deleted the Org shared vision andthe IT shared vision.
OPD SP 1.6 Establish workenvironment standardsIPM SP 1.3 Establish theproject’s work environment
•OT SP 1.1 Establish the strategictraining needs•OT SP 1.3 Establish anOrganizational training tactical planThere may be a relationshipbetween these two SPs but none ofthe OEI material was moved to OT.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 76
OEI SG2 …
CMMI V1.1•OEI SG2 Manage People for
Integration
-SP 2.1 Establish LeadershipMechanisms
-SP 2.2 Establish Incentivesfor Integration
-SP 2.3 Establish Mechanismto Balance Team and HomeOrganization Responsibilities
CMMI V1.2–OPD SG2 Organizational rules
and guidelines that govern theoperation of integrated teamsare provided
SP 2.1 EstablishEmpowerment Mechanisms
•SP 2.2 Establish Rules andGuidelines for IntegratedTeamsEstablish and maintainorganizational rules and guidelinesfor structuring and formingintegrated teams
SP 2.3 Balance Team andHome OrganizationResponsibilities
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 77
The Importance of OEI
OEI is going away, so why should it matter?
What is OEI?•The purpose of Organizational Environment for Integration (OEI) is to
provide an Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD)infrastructure and manage people for integration
What is IPPD?•Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) is a systematic
approach to product development that achieves a timely collaborationof relevant stakeholders throughout the product life cycle to bettersatisfy customer needs
OEI lives for IPPD, and IPPD elements live in various PAs:REQM489 RD470 PP416 TS543 IT231 IPM187, 194 OEI267, 274 OPD308, 313
OPF324, 326 OT358 PP418, 420, 422, 423 SAM521 VER 578, 580
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 78
OEI DependenciesKeeping focus on what’s coming in V1.2, thisought to be a slam dunk …•OPD SP 1.6 Establish work environment
standards•OPD SP 2.1 Establish Empowerment
Mechanisms•OPD SP 2.2 Establish Rules and
Guidelines for Integrated Teams•OPD SP 2.3 Balance Team and Home
Organization Responsibilities•IPM SP 1.3 Establish the project’s work
environment
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 79
OEI Context Diagram (CMMI Distilled)Provide IPPD Infrastructure Manage People for Integration
Establish theOrganization’
s sharedvision
Establish anintegrated
workenvironment
Identify IPPD-unique skill
requirements
EstablishLeadership
mechanisms
Establishincentives for
integration
Establishmechanismsto balance
responsibilities
Integratedproject
management
Organizational training
Decisionanalysis and
resolution
Organization'sshared vision
Guidelines forshared vision
building
Integrated workenvironment
IPPD Tactical andStrategic training
needs
Team andindividual rewards
Guidelines forleadership,
decision-makingcontext
Process for issueresolution
Guidelines forempowerment
Joint performancesreview process
Organizationalguidelines
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 80
Critical OEI Key PracticesOEI SP 1.2 Establish an Integrated Work Environment
OPD SP 1.6 Establish work environment standards
OEI SP 2.1 Establish Leadership Mechanisms OPD SP 2.1 Establish Empowerment Mechanisms
OEI SP 2.3 Establish Mechanism to Balance Team and HomeOrganization Responsibilities OPD SP 2.3 Balance Team and Home Organization Responsibilities
(Still in “Slam Dunk”mode)
1. Why is this practice necessary?
2. What sub practices would you consider significant?
3. Who are the stakeholders?
4. What resistance or implementation issues may occur?
5. What would you look for if appraising this practice?
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 81
CMMI Model Combinations
CMMI Core
SERelated
Examples
Integrated Product andProcess Development
SupplierSourcing
SWRelated
Examples
V 1.1
CMMI Core (now includes SS)
SERelated
Examples
IPPD
SWRelated
Examples
HardwareRelated
Examples
V 1.2
Organizational Goal(OPD)
Project Goal (IPM)
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 82
Other Specific Practice StatementChanges
Revised Practices•OID, SP 1.4: Select process and technology
improvements [not “improvement proposals”] fordeployment across the organization
•OPP, SP 1.1: Select the processes or subprocesses [not“process elements”] in the organization’s set of standardprocesses that are to be included in the organization’sprocess performance analysis
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 83
“Non-model”Change –“High Capabilities”
High capability practice understanding•Improvements needed in understanding Capability
Levels 4&5•Continuous equivalent appraisals have shown the
need…
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 84
Select for Statistical Management
DesignReview
Design Implementation
CodeReview
IntegrationTransition
To Customer
Defectsinjected
Defectsremoved
Defectsinjected
Defectsremoved
Defectsremoved
Defectsremoved
SoftwareRequirements
Defectsinjected
Req.Review
Defectsremoved
Fielded
Defectsremoved
High-leverage elements of the constructed process are identified toprovide strategic management options in order to support timely andpredictably beneficial control of project performance.
Defectsinjected
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 85
N a m e A b b r M L C L 1 C L 2 C L 3 C L 4 C L 5
R e q u i re m e n ts M a n a g e m e n t R E Q M 2
M e a s u re m e n t a n d A n a ly s is M A 2
P r o je c t M o n i to r in g a n d C o n t r o l P M C 2
P r o je c t P la n n in g P P 2
P r o c e s s a n d P ro d u c t Q u a l i t yA s s u ra n c e
P P Q A 2
S u p p l ie r A g re e m e n t M a n a g e m e n t S A M 2
C o n f ig u r a t io n M a n a g e m e n t C M 2
T a r g e tP r o f i l e
2
D e c is io n A n a ly s is a n d R e s o lu t io n D A R 3
P r o d u c t I n te g ra t io n P I 3
R e q u i re m e n ts D e v e lo p m e n t R D 3
T e c h n ic a l S o lu t io n T S 3
V a l id a t io n V A L 3
V e r i f ic a t io n V E R 3
O r g a n iz a t io n a l P ro c e s s D e f in i t io n O P D 3
O r g a n iz a t io n a l P ro c e s s F o c u s O P F 3
In te g ra te d P r o je c t M a n a g e m e n t( IP P D )
IP M 3
R is k M a n a g e m e n t R S K M 3
In te g ra te d S u p p l ie r M a n a g e m e n t IS M 3
O r g a n iz a t io n a l T r a in in g O T 3
In te g ra te d T e a m in g IT 3
O r g a n iz a t io n a l E n v ir o n m e n t fo rI n te g ra t io n
O E I 3
T a r g e tP r o f i l e 3
O r g a n iz a t io n a l P ro c e s sP e r fo rm a n c e
O P P 4
Q u a n t i t a t iv e P r o je c t M a n a g e m e n t Q P M 4
T a r g e tP r o f i l e 4
O r g a n iz a t io n a l I n n o v a t io n a n dD e p lo y m e n t
O ID 5
C a u s a l A n a ly s is a n d R e s o lu t io n C A R 5
T a r g e tP r o f i l e 5
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 86
Example –Maturity Level 3
5
4
3
2
1
0
PP
PM
C
SA
M
ISM
RS
KM
RM
RD
M TS
VE
R
Val PI
CM
PP
QAIT
ISM
QP
M
M&
A
DA
R
OE
I
CA
R
OP
F
OP
D
OT
OP
P
OID
Equivalent to CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS ML 3
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 87
Example –Maturity Level 4
5
4
3
2
1
0
PP
PM
C
SA
M
ISM
RS
KM
RM
RD
M TS
Ver Val PI
CM
PP
QAIT
ISM
QP
M
M&
A
DA
R
OE
I
CA
R
OP
F
OP
D
OT
OP
P
OID
Equivalent to CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS ML 4
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 88
Example –Maturity Level 4
5
4
3
2
1
0
PP
PM
C
SA
M
ISM
RS
KM
RM
RD
M TS
Ver Val PI
CM
PP
QAIT
ISM
QP
M
M&
A
DA
R
OE
I
CA
R
OP
F
OP
D
OT
OP
P
OID
Equivalent to CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS ML 4
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 89
Example –Maturity Level 4
5
4
3
2
1
0
PP
PM
C
SA
M
ISM
RS
KM
RM
RD
M TS
Ver Val PI
CM
PP
QAIT
ISM
QP
M
M&
A
DA
R
OE
I
CA
R
OP
F
OP
D
OT
OP
P
OID
Equivalent to CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS ML 4
Plus 8,388,607 other combinations!!
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 90
Example –Maturity Level 5
5
4
3
2
1
0
PP
PM
C
SA
M
ISM
RS
KM
RM
RD
M TS
Ver Val PI
CM
PP
QAIT
ISM
QP
M
M&
A
DA
R
OE
I
CA
R
OP
F
OP
D
OT
OP
P
OID
Equivalent to CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS ML 5
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 91
Example –Maturity Level 5
5
4
3
2
1
0
PP
PM
C
SA
M
ISM
RS
KM
RM
RD
M TS
Ver Val PI
CM
PP
QAIT
ISM
QP
M
M&
A
DA
R
OE
I
CA
R
OP
F
OP
D
OT
OP
P
OID
Equivalent to CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS ML 5
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 92
Example –Maturity Level 5
5
4
3
2
1
0
PP
PM
C
SA
M
ISM
RS
KM
RM
RD
M TS
Ver Val PI
CM
PP
QAIT
ISM
QP
M
M&
A
DA
R
OE
I
CA
R
OP
F
OP
D
OT
OP
P
OID
Equivalent to CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS ML 5
Plus 847,288,609,442 other combinations!!
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 93
Additional Complexity
Contractor AML 3 or
CLs 3,3,3…
Contractor BML 4 or
CLs 3,3,3…
Contractor CML 5 or
CLs 3,3,3…AcquirerML ? Or
CLs ?,?,?...
My Program
CMMI Math: 3 + 4 + 5 + ? = ?
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 94
Version 1.2 Changes
“Not applicable”process areas (PAs) formaturity levels will be significantly constrained
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 95
The “Not Applicable”Dilemma
The ProblemThe significance of an organization being appraised to be
at Maturity Level x is affected by the model scope usedfor the appraisal. Process areas can be classified asnot applicable.
The SolutionThe model core is now defined to include all components
of the model except the IPPD components. For astaged appraisal only Supplier Agreement Managementand Integrated Supplier Management can be classifiedas not applicable in the core and only then after carefulanalysis.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 96
Version 1.2 Changes
Bring ISM into baseline and incorporate intoSAM
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 97
CMMI Model Combinations
CMMI Core
SERelated
Examples
Integrated Product andProcess Development
SupplierSourcing
SWRelated
Examples
V 1.1
CMMI Core (now includes SS)
SERelated
Examples
IPPD
SWRelated
Examples
HardwareRelated
Examples
V 1.2
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 98
Supplier Agreement Management
Specific Goal
Establish SupplierAgreements
Specific Practice
1.1 –Determine Acquisition Type1.2 –Select Suppliers1.3 –Establish Supplier Agreements
Satisfy SupplierAgreements
2.1 –Execute the Supplier Agreement2.2 –Monitor Selected Supplier
Processes2.3 –Evaluate Selected Supplier Work
Products2.4 –Accept the Acquired Product2.5 –Transition Products
v1.1 SP2.1 “Review COTS Products,”was eliminated. “Identifycandidate COTS products that satisfy requirements”is a newsubpractice under the Technical Solutions Process Area SP1.1,“Develop Alternative Solutions and Selection Criteria.”
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 99
Version 1.2 Changes - RecapMajor changes to expect for Version 1.2 include:•Addison-Wesley book used as starting baseline
- “single book”approach (CMMI-Development+IPPD)•Hardware amplifications added•Amplifications improved•Common features and advanced practices eliminated•“Not applicable”process areas (PAs) for maturity levels
will be significantly constrained•Glossary improved (e.g., higher level management,
bidirectional traceability, subprocess)•Overview text improved•Work Environment material added to OPD and IPM•IPPD coverage consolidated and simplified•ISM will be brought into SAM
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 100
Generic Practice ChangesGP 1.1: The practice title and statement changed fromPerform Base Practices to Perform Specific Practices.
GP 2.2: The informative material was condensed to bemore similar in size to other generic practices.
GP 2.4, Subpractice 1: “Authority”was added to stressassigning both responsibility and authority.
GP 2.6: “Levels of configuration management”waschanged to “under appropriate levels of control”in theGP statement.
GP 5.2: Added informative material explaining the needfor at least one quantitatively managed process.
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 101
TranslationsJapanese•sponsored by Information-Technology Promotion
Agency (IPA)•CMMI models available•Introduction to CMMI course available to authorized
instructors
Traditional Chinese•sponsored by the Institute for Information Industry (III)•CMMI models available•translation of Introduction to CMMI course underway
German Translation•plans are being developed
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 102
Applying CMMI in Small Settings
Where are we with our work in small settings?•completed technical feasibility pilots in Huntsville,
Alabama with two small companies in the US Army supplychain
•posted the toolkit from this pilot for review:- http://www.sei.cmu.edu/ttp/publications/toolkit
•chartered a project to further research in and evolveguidance for CMMI in Small Settings (CSS)
Where are we going?•International Research Workshop for Process
Improvement in Small Settings held October 19-20, 2005
•call for Interest in CSS project is posted on SEI web:- http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/acss/participation.html
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 103
SCAMPI A Changes for v1.2
Affirmation Clarifications•clarify the use of “virtual”vs. “live”interviews•change “face-to-face”affirmations to “oral”affirmations
Alternative Practice Characterization•clarify how alternative practices are mapped and characterized
Practice Characterization Rules•revise and clarify practice characterization rules in the SCAMPI
Method Definition Document (MDD) Section 2.2.2
Incremental appraisals•conduct appraisal in organization or model increments•goal satisfaction fixed at time of appraisal
Organizational unit sampling options
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 104
ARC V1.2 Changes Being Considered
Remove requirement for instruments•Only two types of Objective Evidence –Documents andInterviews•Thus presentations may be either documents orinterviews
Clarify “Not Rated”•Process Areas out of the model scope are “Out of Scope”•Process Areas that cannot be rated are “Not Rated”
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 105
Beyond CMMI v1.2 –Training
The SEI plans the following enhancements to CMMItraining:
•update the High Maturity with Statistics course
•create a new course that addresses interpretation andimplementation issues
•make a new course available that provides insight intousing Team Software ProcessSM/Personal SoftwareProcessSM and CMMI
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University page 106
For More Information…For more information about CMMI•http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/ (main CMMI site)
Other Web sites of interest include•http://seir.sei.cmu.edu/seir/ (Software Engineering
Information Repository)
•http://dtic.mil/ndia (annual CMMI TechnologyConferences)
•http://seir.sei.cmu.edu/pars (publicly released SCAMPIappraisal summaries)
•https://bscw.sei.cmu.edu/pub/bscw.cgi/0/79783
Or, contactSEI Customer RelationsPhone: 412 / 268-5800Email: customer-relations@sei.cmu.edu
top related