My observations from sepg 2002 march 7 2002
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 14

My Observations from SEPG 2002 March 7, 2002 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 76 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

My Observations from SEPG 2002 March 7, 2002. Larry Dribin, Ph.D. SOGETI, A CAP GEMINI COMPANY Phone: (847) 807-7390 Email: [email protected] or [email protected] V1.1. What Were My Most Important Lesson Learned?. It was a hard choice - 7 concurrent tracks

Download Presentation

My Observations from SEPG 2002 March 7, 2002

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


My observations from sepg 2002 march 7 2002

My Observations from SEPG 2002March 7, 2002

Larry Dribin, Ph.D.

SOGETI, A CAP GEMINI COMPANY

Phone: (847) 807-7390

Email: [email protected] or

[email protected]

V1.1


What were my most important lesson learned

What Were My Most Important Lesson Learned?

  • It was a hard choice - 7 concurrent tracks

    • 2 tracks on Level 2

    • 1 tracks on Level 3

    • 2 tracks on Special Topics

    • 1 track on CMMI

  • Topics I Considered:

    • “Do’s and Don’ts of Software Process Improvement”

    • “What the Authors Intended at Levels 4 and 5”

    • “Aggressively moving from CMM Level 1 to CMM Level 3 in One Year”

    • “What Would I Do Differently If I Wrote The SEPG Guide Today?”

    • “Competitive Software Teams”

I learned quite a bit in these session, but no “Ah Ha”!


I had an ah ha after attending

I Had An “Ah Ha” After Attending:

  • Keynote: “Conversations with Watts Humphrey”, by Michael Mah

  • Keynote: Barry Boehm, “The Fate of Bright Ideas: Why They are Not Always Adopted”

  • Panel Session: “Capability Maturity Models Are Not Relevant in Modern Development Environments”

    Ah Ha: Agile Processes & CMM (versus Agile or CMM)

  • Panel Session: “The Loyal Opposition Versus the CMMI Champions: A Frank Discussion of CMMI Models”

    Ah Ha: The CMM May Still Live (versus CMM  CMMI)

After attending these sessions I felt as though major changes may be underway in software process improvement.


First remember the cmm sw vision

First Remember the CMM-SW Vision

“ I wanted to get software organizations to adopt Deming’s approach to continuous improvement, but I realized it had to be done in stages.”

  • Watts Humphrey, creator of the CMM-SW

  • Eliminate chaos (Level 2)

  • Establish common processes (Level 3)

  • Understand process capability and control variation in process performance (Level 4)

  • Continuously improve capability of critical processes (Level 5)


  • First remember the cmm sw vision but

    First Remember the CMM-SW Vision, but …

    “ I wanted to get software organizations to adopt Deming’s approach to continuous improvement, but I realized it had to be done in stages.”

    • Watts Humphrey, creator of the CMM-SW

  • Eliminate chaos (Level 2)

  • Establish common processes (Level 3)

  • Understand process capability and control variation in process performance (Level 4)

  • Continuously improve capability of critical processes (Level 5)

  • Source: Pat O’Toole,

    “The Do’s and Don’ts of Software Process Improvement”


    Agile processes cmm versus agile or cmm pro cmm cmms are relevant because they work

    Agile Processes & CMM (versus Agile or CMM)Pro CMM: CMMs are Relevant because they work!

    • Source: Stan Rifkin,

    • “CMMs are Relevant to Modern Software Development”


    Agile processes cmm versus agile or cmm con cmm people oriented barely sufficient methodology

    Agile Processes & CMM (versus Agile or CMM)Con CMM: People oriented “Barely Sufficient Methodology”

    Source: Jim Highsmith, Cutter Consortium,

    “Is the CMM: Is It Relevant Today?”


    My observations from sepg 2002 march 7 2002

    Agile Processes & CMM (versus Agile or CMM)Con CMM: CMM Supports Waterfall and not Modern Iterative Development Processes

    Source: Walker Royce, Rational Software, “Are Capability Maturity Models Relevant in Modern Development Environments?”


    Agile processes cmm versus agile or cmm my take away

    Agile Processes & CMM (versus Agile or CMM)My Take Away

    • CMM experts are talking about agile approaches to software development

    • Too often these experts “demonize” the new agile approaches

    • Each may have its own home space

      • Source: Interpretation of Barry Boehm’s keynote

    • The key is that the dialog has begun

    • This dialog is healthy and should generate improvements in Software Process Improvement!


    The cmm may still live versus cmm cmmi background

    The CMM May Still Live (versus CMM  CMMI)Background

    • Source: “The Loyal Opposition Versus the CMMI Champions: A Frank Discussion of CMMI Models” (Panel Discussion, Marilyn Bush Moderator)


    The cmm may still live versus cmm cmmi pro cmmi

    The CMM May Still Live (versus CMM  CMMI)Pro CMMI

    • CMMI explicitly links to business objectives vs. implicit in CMM

    • CMMI Incorporates learning from CMM-SW (CMM v2c was the starting point)

    • It includes Product Engineering

    • It Covers Standards and Business Strategies

    • Applies well to small organizations

    • Adapts to different improvement approaches

      • Staged vs. continuous

    • Expands to incorporate new disciplines

    Source:

    Mike Konrad - Software Engineering Institute

    Tim Kasse - Kasse Initiatives


    The cmm may still live versus cmm cmmi pro cmm pro choice

    The CMM May Still Live (versus CMM  CMMI)Pro CMM – Pro Choice

    • The CMM serves the un-served majority (Commercial non-DOD, non-Systems Engineers)

    • CMMI is TOO BIG

    • CMMI is TOO EXPENSIVE

    • CMMI is hard to tailor and forces unnecessary complexity

      • It buries known vital things

      • Compromised and confusing representations

    • CMM is Being Suppressed (a.k.a. Sunsetting of the CMM-SW at the end of 2003 (2005)

    Source: Judah Mogilensky - Process Enhancement Partners

    Mark Servello - ChangeBridge


    The cmm may still live versus cmm cmmi pro cmm proposal free v2

    The CMM May Still Live (versus CMM  CMMI)Pro CMM Proposal: Free V2

    • CMM v2.0c – October 1997 was almost ready to be released

      • An enhancement to CMM-SW v1.1

      • Smaller and “lighter” than the CMMI

    • Movement started to release CMM version 2 (which was about to be released when the project was shut down in favor of CMMI three years ago)

      • If SEI will not release it, possible release it as a “freeware” document

      • Provide training courses in CMM v2.0

      • Provide an assessment approach similar to the CBA-IPI for CMM-SW v2.0

    • Key issue is funding

    Let the market decide between CMM-SW and CMMI


    Summary

    Summary

    • We are in exciting times

    • New ideas – Agile Programming

    • New Products – CMMI v1.1 (and CMM v2.0?)

    • Thought provoking. Let’s watch what happens.

    Renewed energy and new choices which will improve the state of Software Process Improvement.


  • Login