1 / 30

SM SCAMPI, SCAMPI Lead Appraiser, and SEI are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

Interpretive Guidance Project: What We Know CMMI User’s Conference November 18, 2003. SM SCAMPI, SCAMPI Lead Appraiser, and SEI are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

janina
Download Presentation

SM SCAMPI, SCAMPI Lead Appraiser, and SEI are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Interpretive Guidance Project: What We Know CMMI User’s Conference November 18, 2003 • SM SCAMPI, SCAMPI Lead Appraiser, and SEI are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University. • ®Capability Maturity Model Integration, Capability Maturity Model, Capability Maturity Modeling, CMMI, and CMM are registered in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office.

  2. Topics • Project Overview and Status • Preliminary Report Summary • Questions

  3. Interpretive Guidance Objectives • To understand and address the issues that software organizations have when using CMMI • To allow current SW-CMM users to more easily upgrade to CMMI • To eliminate as many perceived barriers to CMMI adoption as possible • To make CMMI adoption easy

  4. Project Status Highlights – Phase I • Phase I activities have been completed. • Collected comments from Birds-of-a-Feather sessions in conjunction with conferences and SPIN meetings • Formed expert group • Received responses from Web-based questionnaire • Received very limited feedback from SCAMPISMappraisals • Performed preliminary analysis of issues • Released Interpretive Guidance Preliminary Report (available on CMMI Website)

  5. Project Status Highlights – Phase II • Purpose is to analyze issues to determine: • if interpretive guidance is needed • where interpretive guidance is appropriate • what form interpretive guidance will take • Phase II activities just getting started. • At a minimum we will • perform detailed analysis of the issues • conduct detailed interviews to investigate issue areas further • meet with groups at SEI to share analysis and to understand how their activities support/address identified issues • present preliminary data at conferences to make sure that the data is correct and our analysis is accurate • produce a final report to document our findings and conclusions • interpretive guidance for software organizations • summary and conclusions from this task

  6. Preliminary Report Describes the data-collection activities from both Birds of a Feather (BoF) sessions and Web-based questionnaire efforts Includes summaries of the data collected through August 2003

  7. BoF Sessions Attended • CMMI Users Group • ICSPI Conference • New York City SPIN • QAAM/QAI Conference on Managing Software Excellence PROFES 2002 • Acquisition of SW-Intensive Systems • SEPG 2003 • Southern California SPIN meeting • San Diego SPIN meeting • bITa Europe Conference • NDIA Transition Workshop • STC 2003 • European SEPG Conference • Practical Software Measurement

  8. Web-Based Questionnaire • Notified ~7,000 people • 4,000 people with direct internet access • 3,000 people that the questionnaire was available • placed an announcement on the SEI Web site • The numbers of responses received for the sections of the questionnaire were: • 668 Background and Context (required section) • 587 Global Issues • 339 Generic Goals and Generic Practices • 182 Specific Process Areas

  9. Background • Nine questions were asked to understand the background of the respondent • Some questions were specific to the person filling out the questionnaire • Other questions were providing background information about the organization • Highlights are presented in the following slides

  10. How would you best describe your familiarity with CMMI? Didn't respond 1% Total Respondents = 668 Use it regularly 54% Use it occasionally 25% Heard of it 19% Never heard of it 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percent of Respondents

  11. What if any CMMI training have you received? (Multiple responses were permitted) SCAMPI team training 17% Total Respondents = 668 SCAMPI lead appraiser training 17% CMMI instructor training 10% Intermediate CMMI 35% Introduction to CMMI 95% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Respondents

  12. Approximately how many appraisals, if any, have been conducted in your organization since June 2000? (Multiple responses were permitted) Other appraisal methods or gap analyses 2695 Total Respondents = 668 SCE 335 CBA IPI 1395 SCAMPI class B or C 1077 SCAMPI class A 374 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Number of appraisals conducted

  13. Has your organization made a decision about adopting CMMI? Didn't respond 4% Total Respondents = 668 Chosen not to adopt CMMI 10% Well institutionalized in organization 15% Adoption in progress 48% Decision not made yet 23% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percent of Respondents

  14. What is your personal role in process improvement? (Multiple responses were permitted) Other 13% Consultant to organizations (CMM or CMMI) 35% Member of the technical staff 27% Member of the management team 42% Support for process improvement activities 73% Policy for adoption of new technologies 26% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percent of Respondents Total Respondents = 668

  15. Approximately how many full-time equivalent (FTE) employees does your organization employ who are primarily engaged in the development, maintenance, or acquisition of software or software-intensive systems? Didn't respond 3% More than 500 37% 29% 100 to 500 Less than 100 31% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percent of Respondents Total Respondents = 668

  16. How would you best describe your familiarity with the Software CMM? Didn't respond 2% Use it regularly 65% Use it occasionally 21% Heard of it Total Respondents = 668 11% Never heard of it 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percent of Respondents

  17. Global Issues • Thirteen questions were asked • General questions that address CMMI adoption • CMMI concepts or terminology • model representations • costs • ROI • Highlights are presented in the following slides

  18. In your opinion, is CMMI adequate for guiding process improvement? 0% Didn't Respond 10% Don't know 1% Rarely if ever 12% Sometimes 42% More often than not 35% Almost always 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Total Respondents = 587 Percent of Respondents

  19. Adopting CMMI will help us to leverage our earlier investments in process improvement. Didn't Respond 4% Don't Know 13% Strongly Disagree 1% Disagree 6% Agree 47% Strongly Agree 29% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Total Respondents = 587 Percent of Respondents

  20. Existing CMMI training courses, guidance documents, web resources, and other process assets are adequate for our purposes. Didn't Respond 5% Don't Know 15% Strongly Disagree 6% Disagree 17% Agree 48% Strongly Agree 9% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% Total Respondents = 587 Percent of Respondents

  21. Existing CMMI appraisal methods are suitable for our organization's needs. Didn't Respond 5% Don't Know 26% Total Respondents = 587 Strongly Disagree 4% Disagree 15% 39% Agree Strongly Agree 11% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Percent of Respondents

  22. The cost of adopting CMMI is impeding the adoption of CMMI in our organization. Didn't Respond 6% Don't Know 11% Total Respondents = 587 Strongly Disagree 8% 32% Disagree Agree 27% Strongly Agree 16% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Percent of Respondents

  23. Including both systems engineering and software in a single model has been a help for us. Didn't Respond 6% Don't Know 15% Total Respondents = 587 Strongly Disagree 5% Disagree 10% Agree 31% Strongly Agree 33% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Percent of Respondents

  24. We have had difficulty in mapping our processes to the CMMI. 7% Didn't Respond Don't Know 16% Strongly Disagree 18% 41% Disagree Agree 15% Strongly Agree 3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Total Respondents = 587 Percent of Respondents

  25. We have had difficulty tracking the changes and additions from models that we have previously used. Didn't Respond 8% Don't Know 26% 11% Strongly Disagree Disagree 43% Agree 10% 2% Strongly Agree 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Total Respondents = 587 Percent of Respondents

  26. Having a choice between the two model representations (staged or continuous) and variations (SW, SE, IPPD, SS) has been helpful for us. Didn't Respond 8% Don't Know 20% 6% Strongly Disagree Disagree 17% 35% Agree Strongly Agree 14% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Total Respondents = 587 Percent of Respondents

  27. Does your organization need ROI or other quantitative evidence to help make the business case for adopting CMMI? Didn't Respond 6% No, it's not a real issue 12% for us No, we've already built a 14% good business case Yes, it certainly would 44% help to have Yes, we must have it 24% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Total Respondents = 587 Percent of Respondents

  28. Conclusions • The responses were overwhelmingly positive. • Much of the data collected is not unique to commercial software, IT, and IS organizations. Similar data was reported by organizations in disciplines such as systems engineering and acquisition. • We still need to conduct our detailed analysis. • Copies of the report are available on the CMMI Website at http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/.

  29. ? Questions ? ?

  30. For More Information About CMMI • Go to CMMI Web site: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi http://seir.sei.cmu.edu • Contact SEI Customer Relations: Customer RelationsSoftware Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburgh, PA 15213-3890FAX: (412) 268-5800 customer-relations@sei.cmu.edu

More Related