Capability Maturity Model: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>BobKilcoyne Narrower gap |
imported>BlaqWiedow |
||
| Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
=== Capability Maturity Model Integration === | === Capability Maturity Model Integration === | ||
The CMMI model's application in software development has sometimes been problematic. Applying multiple models that are not integrated within and across an organization could be costly in training, appraisals, and improvement activities. The [[Capability Maturity Model Integration]] (CMMI) project was formed to sort out the problem of using multiple models for software development processes, thus the CMMI model has superseded the CMM model, though the CMM model continues to be a general theoretical process capability model used in the public domain.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NJ0Apk1iNDAC&q=The+Capability+Maturity+Model+Integration+%28CMMI%29+project+was+formed+to+sort+out+the+problem+of+using+multiple+models+for+software+development+processes%2C+thus+the+CMMI+model+has+superseded+the+CMM+model%2C+though+the+CMM+model+continues+to+be+a+general+theoretical+process+capability+model+used+in+the+public+domain&pg=PA486|title=Juran'S Quality Hb 6E|last=Juran|date=2010-08-26|publisher=McGraw-Hill Education (India) Pvt Limited|isbn=9780071070898|language=en}}</ref> | The CMMI model's application in software development has sometimes been problematic. Applying multiple models that are not integrated within and across an organization could be costly in training, appraisals, and improvement activities. The [[Capability Maturity Model Integration]] (CMMI) project was formed to sort out the problem of using multiple models for software development processes, thus the CMMI model has superseded the CMM model, though the CMM model continues to be a general theoretical process capability model used in the public domain.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NJ0Apk1iNDAC&q=The+Capability+Maturity+Model+Integration+%28CMMI%29+project+was+formed+to+sort+out+the+problem+of+using+multiple+models+for+software+development+processes%2C+thus+the+CMMI+model+has+superseded+the+CMM+model%2C+though+the+CMM+model+continues+to+be+a+general+theoretical+process+capability+model+used+in+the+public+domain&pg=PA486|title=Juran'S Quality Hb 6E|last=Juran|date=2010-08-26|publisher=McGraw-Hill Education (India) Pvt Limited|isbn=9780071070898|language=en}}</ref><ref name=sei93cmm/><ref>{{Cite book|title=Proceedings of the International Conference on Transformations in Engineering Education|last=Natarajan|first=R|publisher=Springer|year=2015}}</ref> | ||
In 2016, the responsibility for CMMI was transferred to the Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA). ISACA subsequently released CMMI v2.0 in 2021. It was upgraded again to CMMI v3.0 in 2023. CMMI now places a greater emphasis on the process architecture which is typically realized as a process diagram. Copies of CMMI are available now only by subscription. | In 2016, the responsibility for CMMI was transferred to the Information Systems Audit and Control Association ([[ISACA]]). ISACA subsequently released CMMI v2.0 in 2021. It was upgraded again to CMMI v3.0 in 2023. CMMI now places a greater emphasis on the [[process architecture]] which is typically realized as a process diagram. Copies of CMMI are available now only by subscription. | ||
===Adapted to other processes=== | ===Adapted to other processes=== | ||
| Line 116: | Line 116: | ||
===Structure=== | ===Structure=== | ||
The model involves five aspects: | The model involves five aspects: | ||
* ''Maturity Levels:'' a 5-level process maturity continuum - where the uppermost (5th) level is a notional ideal state where processes would be systematically managed by a combination of process optimization and continuous process improvement. | * ''Maturity Levels:'' a 5-level process maturity continuum - where the uppermost (5th) level is a notional ideal state where processes would be systematically managed by a combination of [[process optimization]] and continuous process improvement. | ||
* ''Key Process Areas:'' a Key Process Area identifies a cluster of related activities that, when performed together, achieve a set of goals considered important. | * ''Key Process Areas:'' a Key Process Area identifies a cluster of related activities that, when performed together, achieve a set of goals considered important. | ||
* ''Goals:'' the goals of a key process area summarize the states that must exist for that key process area to have been implemented in an effective and lasting way. The extent to which the goals have been accomplished is an indicator of how much capability the organization has established at that maturity level. The goals signify the scope, boundaries, and intent of each key process area. | * ''Goals:'' the goals of a key process area summarize the states that must exist for that key process area to have been implemented in an effective and lasting way. The extent to which the goals have been accomplished is an indicator of how much capability the organization has established at that maturity level. The goals signify the scope, boundaries, and intent of each key process area. | ||
| Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
===Levels=== | ===Levels=== | ||
[[File:Characteristics of Capability Maturity Model.svg|thumb]] | |||
There are five levels defined along the continuum of the model and, according to the SEI: "Predictability, effectiveness, and control of an organization's software processes are believed to improve as the organization moves up these five levels. While not rigorous, the empirical evidence to date supports this belief".<ref>[http://www.michigan.gov/documents/CMM_39213_7.pdf State of Michigan SDLC Appendix on CMM] Attests to 2001 use of the text so it couldn't have come from here.</ref> | There are five levels defined along the continuum of the model and, according to the SEI: "Predictability, effectiveness, and control of an organization's software processes are believed to improve as the organization moves up these five levels. While not rigorous, the empirical evidence to date supports this belief".<ref>[http://www.michigan.gov/documents/CMM_39213_7.pdf State of Michigan SDLC Appendix on CMM] Attests to 2001 use of the text so it couldn't have come from here.</ref> | ||
# ''Initial'' (chaotic, ad hoc, individual heroics) - the starting point for use of a new or undocumented repeat process. | # ''Initial'' (chaotic, ad hoc, individual heroics) - the starting point for use of a new or undocumented repeat process. | ||
| Line 147: | Line 148: | ||
===Critique=== | ===Critique=== | ||
The model was originally intended to evaluate the ability of government contractors to perform a software project. It has been used for and may be suited to that purpose, but critics | The model was originally intended to evaluate the ability of government contractors to perform a software project. It has been used for and may be suited to that purpose, but critics pointed out that process maturity according to the CMM was not necessarily mandatory for successful software development.<ref>{{cite journal |last1= Karahodža |first1= Bakir |last2= Avdagić-Golub |first2= Elma |last3= Čolaković |first3= Alem |title= Assessment of factors affecting the software process improvement in small organizations |journal= Science, Engineering and Technology |date= 30 April 2022 |volume= 2 |issue= 1 |pages= 7–15 |url= https://setjournal.com/index.php/SET/article/view/24 |access-date= 2026-05-14 |doi= 10.54327/set2022/v2.i1.24 |issn= 2831-1043}}</ref> | ||
===Software process framework=== | ===Software process framework=== | ||