Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Achievement Quick and Lean with codeBeamer!

September 16, 2014

blog-140916-cmmi-336x884 Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Achievement Quick and Lean with codeBeamer! alm Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI achievement quick and lean with code BeamerCMMI for Development at Level 2 and 3 can be achieved by SMEs easily. Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is a process improvement and appraisal program implemented by Carnegie Mellon University. The certified level of Capability Maturity is required by many US and European customers especially in government or elsewhere in larger software development projects, where SMEs can be involved as suppliers. CMMI has 5 different maturity levels, Levels 4 and 5 of course is more dedicated to large organizations. Some people think, that CMMI in general is only for huge organisations. This is not true! CMMI Level 2 and 3 can be easily achieved by smaller organizations as well, and there are many Pros to do so. The main pros and cons for small and medium sized businesses are:

Main PROs:

  • Increase trustworthiness – already in the negotiation phase with your Clients – as an outsourcing partner
  • Improve company image and marketing
  • Comply with large companies or government tenders
  • Improve quality of the product
  • Deliver in-time and budget to satisfy and impress clients
  • Generate new business

Main CONs:

  • may generate additional overheads and higher costs
  • Processes can be less agile

CMMI provides new business potential for companies in all IT markets. To leverage all this potential like fulfilment of tender requirements or improvement of performance (in time, within budget) companies have to start with their processes. The good news is, they don’t need to start from scratch. CMMI is a very comprehensive guideline across projects, divisions or an entire organization specialized on software development. The Standard gives you guidance and after certification, a good external proof and standing in the market.

According to the statistics CMMI Level 2 and 3 can be easily achieved by SMEs – 70% – by implementing the defined processes and managing them properly. The challenge for smaller companies is getting all those gains while avoiding the pains like overhead, cost and reduced agility. A smart platform can help achieve this goal.

CMMI implementation can be quick and maintenance can be Lean with codeBeamer!

CMMI requires to have planned and managed processes. CMMI for Development by using an Application Lifecycle Management tool like codeBeamer requires less time and effort to be implemented, and once achieved the required level, codeBeamer helps you to maintain Lean and with minimal overhead. codeBeamer supports the quick implementation and Lean operation with:

  • One integrated platform, based on a single repository for requirements, development, testing, deployment, collaboration, documentation as well as versioning and total base-lining
  • Overall traceability – due to the fully integrated lifecycle traceability of all artifacts is ensured.
  • Planning and controlling – Project-Product-Release-Delivery planning are build in features, including reporting and dashboards for controlling
  • Team collaboration – one platform, one communication channel, and integrated e-mail alert and notification helps team to access up-to-date data.
  • Documentation and Wiki included
  • Highly customizable workflow-driven task and issue management.
  • Great reporting Features, full history, granular rights Management for easy control and measurement

Try codeBeamer by downloading the latest version and ask our Sales Team for CMMI customization to understand how you can achieve CMMI compliance more quickly and keep working more Lean!

facebook Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Achievement Quick and Lean with codeBeamer! alm twitter Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Achievement Quick and Lean with codeBeamer! alm google Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Achievement Quick and Lean with codeBeamer! alm linkedin Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Achievement Quick and Lean with codeBeamer! alm

Tags:

ALM,

Related Brochure

How to Select the ALM Solution that Best Suits Your Needs

First Name

Last Name

Email Address

Company

Phone Number

Industry

Reka Moksony

Written by

Reka is an economist with an MBA and 10+ years of experience in ICT with ERP, SCM, web, and mobile applications, as well as skills in international business development, consulting, and project management. You will find her blog posts on a variety of subjects from application lifecycle management and software quality standards to Agile methods.

Reka Moksony has written 42 posts for Intland Software.

1 Comment. Leave new

Thanks so much for your feedback Reka. I am a huge fan of doauigle. I’ll address each of your thoughts in turn.You have many excellent insights on architecture, but “Why Maturity Model Don’t Work in Architecture” doesn’t reflect an understanding of the CMMI model and its use. Have you every actually used the model? Indeed, I have worked with many organizations both in the public and private sector operating both with and without CMMI process guidance. You cite as disadvantages:1. Process-centric. It’s true that you can get the process right but not product good artifacts. CMMI doesn’t claim to be the ONLY thing you have to do to build good systems, just an enabler.OK. So we agree that CMMI is process-centric. Furthermore, we agree that good process does not necessarily produce good artifacts. Now we have to wade into the realm of limited resources and limited attention span of most organizations. They will typically only have budget / patience / focus to do one thing from a maturity perspective. In which case, my argument is that they should do things which focus upon produce valuable architecture outputs. 2. Binary. The CMMI is not binary (although it has a top-level scoring system). Anyone who has implemented the model knows that there are over 300 practices which can be implemented at very levels of completeness across none to some to all projects within your organization.The trouble is that this is how 90% of the organizations that I work with approach CMMI. It is nearly always used as a litmus test to support contracting and is treated as a go’ / no go’ type of benchmark. While it may be true that is doesn’t have to be done in this way, it is so commonly implemented in this fashion that I find I am working with an uphill battle to try and convince an organization to approach CMMI differently. There is far too much inertia around it already.3. Idealistic. Totally false that no firms every actually implement the top levels – please cite the source of your data.Every organization of any size that I have worked with that claimed CMMI 5 accomplished this coveted status by selecting a small division or special project to go through the Herculean effort of operating at level 5 long enough to get the designation. The rest of the organization could not operate at that level and still produce sufficient value to justify their existence. It simply is not practical. Maybe I have just encountered all of the exceptions that prove the rule, but this has been my experience in Defense, Insurance, Telecom, and Energy. Moreover, every architectural maturity model that I have ever seen which is based off of CMMI (and remember that my post is in the context of architecture) depicts a utopian top-level that is unrealistic (see Open Group’s OSIMM, Progress / Sonic’s SOAMM, NAS CIO’s EAMM, etc.).4. Wholesale. It is not a wholesale model, and anyone who has implemented the model knows that each project within an organization can be assessed against the model at various levels. Ever CMMI-implementing organization I know celebrates numerous intermediate milestones.You are right, it can be done in an incremental and as-needed basis. But in practice, I find this is rarely done when applying CMMI to the realm of architecture. Certainly it can work well when applied to IT process maturity, but I have not seen an organization successfully apply it to gauge the maturity of architecture.You have an excellent grasp of architectural concepts and even suggest a process for building a rubric, so you clearly understand the value of process. Also, you favor rubrics, and CMMI is a rubric with criteria and standards, and is primarily used to assess and communciate. Your CMMI bashing comes off naive and disingenuous. Perhaps I have simply encountered a large number of organizations that have misapplied CMMI in the context of architecture, but I have yet to find one that has done it well. I was not setting out to bash CMMI but rather to highlight why it is ill-suited for gauging the maturity of architecture. CMMI has its place and I believe that the emphasis that CMMI places upon process is viable if what you need to do is improve the efficient operation of the IT organization. If, however, your goal is to improve the quality and effectiveness of your architecture outputs, then CMMI is not a strong fit for that. Furthermore, if you have limited resources (time, money, attention, etc.) available to dedicate to maturity activities, then I have found that focusing your efforts towards improving the quality of architecture outputs yields far better results than adherence to a traditional process-centric maturity perspective.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *