Agile CMMI Summary

CMMI® : St George or the Dragon?
I T &S A e r o s p a c e D e f e n c e
 Trevor Rudge,
 Thales Research and Technology, UK
® CMMI is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Carnegie Mellon University
Thales Research and Technology UK

Contents
 Overview
 Why Thales is a CMMI® Early Adopter
 Deployment in Thales
 Pitfalls and Risks
Date, reference
2 Thales Research and Technology UK

Contents
 Overview
Date, reference

Key Points to Improve Performance
PEOPLE
Process holds the elements together

PROCESS TECHNOLOGY
Major determinants of product cost, Process

schedule, and quality
SW Products
Practices
Technology
People
Date, reference

What Is a Capability Maturity Model ?
 Capability Maturity Model (CMM®*) :
"A Capability Maturity Model (CMM) contains the

essential elements of effective processes for
one or more disciplines.
It also describes an evolutionary improvement
path from an ad hoc, immature process to a
disciplined, mature process with improved
quality and effectiveness"
Date, reference
(R) CMMI is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Carnegie Mellon University.

CMMI® -Based Improvement Could Help
 Improve how people work so they can make better use of tools
and technology.
 Use a reference model which is based on practices already

found to be successful.
 Use a reference model developed by other industry members

and which is internationally recognised
 CMMI® models meet this requirement.

Date, reference
® CMMI is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Carnegie Mellon University

Proliferation of CMMs ==> CMMI®
SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
Sw-CMM® v2.0
IPPD* CMMI®
CMMI for
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
SE/SW/IPPD*/SS*
SE-CMM & SECAM
(v1.1)
reducing of :
Sw- ACQUISITION - redundancies
CMM - additional complexity
- costs & times
- discrepancies
* IPPD : Integrated Product and Process Development
SS : Supplier Sourcing
Date, reference

Overview of CMMI® Process Areas
CMMI Options: * with Integrated Product & Process Development (IPPD)

** with Supplier Sourcing (SS)
Level Project Management Engineering Support Process Management
5 Optimizing CAR: Causal Analysis OID: Organizational

and Resolution Innovation
4 Quantitati- QPM: Quantitative &Deployment
OPP: Organizational
vely
Managed Project Management Process Performance
IPM: Integrated Project RD: Requirements DAR: Decision Analysis OPF: Organizational
Management Development and Resolution Process Focus
RSKM: Risk TS: Technical OEI*: Organizational OPD: Organizational
3 Defined Management Solution Environment for Process Definition
IT*: Integrated PI: Product Integration OT: Organizational
Teaming Integration Training
ISM**: Integrated VER: Verification
Supplier Management
PP: Project Planning REQM
VAL : Requirements MA: Measurement and
: Validation
PMC: Project Management Analysis
Monitoring and Control PPQA: Process &
2 Managed Product Quality
SAM: Supplier
Agreement Assurance
Date, reference
Management CM: Configuration

Management
1 Initial

The CMMI® Project
 Sponsored by the DOD and the National Defense
Industrial Association (NDIA)
 1998 to 2000
 Collaborative endeavour
 Industry (Defense, Aerospace & Commercial)
 Government
 Software Engineering Institute (SEI) Carnegie Mellon
University
 EER Systems
 Motorola
 U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force
 Ericsson Canada
 Northrop Grumman
 Federal Aviation Administration
 Ernst and Young
 Pacific Bell
 National Security Agency
 General Dynamics
 Q-Labs
 Software Engineering Institute
 Harris Corporation
 Raytheon
 ADP, Inc.
 Honeywell
 Rockwell Collins
 AT&T Labs
 KPMG
 Sverdrup Corporation
 BAE
Date, reference
 Litton
 THALES
 Boeing
 Lockheed Martin
 TRW
 Computer Sciences Corporation

Some CMMI® Early Adopters
 The Boeing Company  Northrop Grumman

 Computer Sciences Corporation Information Technology Sector
(CSC) Integrated Systems Sector -
 Defense Group Airborne Early Warning/Electronic
 Concurrent Technologies Warfare Systems
Corporation (CTC)  Raytheon Company
 National Security Division  TRW
 General Dynamics Land Systems  United Space Alliance
 Goddard Space Flight Center NASA  U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC
 Harris Corporation Software Enterprise
 Lockheed Martin
 Motorola, Inc.  THALES
Date, reference

Contents
 Overview
Date, reference

THALES Process Improvement Roadmap
In synergy with ISO 9000, Tickit, EFQM, ...
Hw - CMM
Transition
SE - CMM to CMMI
Sw - CMM
Level 4
Level 3
Level 2
Date, reference
92 94 96 98 2000 02

What is a Low Maturity Organization?
 Highly dependent on current practitioners
 Improvised by practitioners and management
 Not rigorously followed
 Results difficult to predict
 Low visibility into progress and quality
 Compromise of product functionality and quality

to meet schedule
 Use of new technology is risky

Date, reference

What is a High Maturity Organization
 A disciplined approach for development and

management
 Defined and continuously improving
 Supported by management and others
 Well controlled
 Supported by measurement
Date, reference
 Basis for disciplined use of technology Institutionalized

Some Typical Problems
 Specifications
 requirements not always identified
 requirements not always verifiable
 Allocation to components incomplete
 Requirements traceability informal
 Poor integration of disciplines
 Lessons are not learned from the past

 The systems engineers are permanently reinventing the
Date, reference
wheel

Some Typical Problems
We’ll See
 Specifications We’ll See
 requirements not always identified Look what
I’ve already
 requirements not always verifiable Invented
 Allocation to components incomplete
 Requirements traceability informal
 Poor integration of disciplines
 Lessons are not learned from the past

 The systems engineers are permanently reinventing the
Date, reference
wheel

CMMI® : the Manager’s Vision
Maturity Level Characteristics Management visibility Business
Optimising Continuous and view
Probability
measurable E S
5 process
improvement is a Target Time / Cost
Quantita- way of life
Business-oriented
Probability
tively
Managed process S
E
management, the
4 performance of Target Time / Cost
Defined Thethe processes

process is
Probability
predictable
defined at the
S
organisation level E
3 are tailored to the
project. Performance Targe Time / Cost
is more predictable
Project t
Managed
Probability
management is S
more disciplined. E
2 Past successes Target Time / Cost
can be expected
Initial Performance is
Probability
on similar projects
difficult to predict.
Date, reference
E
Practices may not S
1 Target Time / Cost
be effective, rely
on individuals

Results measured by a THALES Unit
for Software impact on cost deviation
Average Cost Between CMM level 1 and
Variance - % Project Distribution
CMM level 3
reduced by 20% 10 software projects for each
60 plot
On average late 96 Level 3
to acceptance -
50
divided by 24
94 Level 2
Number of 40
defects during
Customer 30
acceptance -
divided by 20 92 Level 1
20
Cost of customer
acceptance - 10
reduced by 60%
Date, reference
- - - + + + + + + +
30 20 10 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
% Cost deviation

Impact of Process Improvement
GLOBALLY
• Change of culture
• Inter-personnel
relationships improvement
• Confidence &
Responsibility atmosphere
On PROJECTS On ORGANISATIONS
• Engineering community sharing

• Respect of Cost and Schedule
common references & practices
Commitments
facilitates :
• Practices Efficiency
• People mobility
Improvement
• Career management
• Satisfaction of business and
Date, reference
• Company workforce
quality objectives
management

Contents
 Overview
Date, reference

CMMI Assessments in Thales
 6 SCAMPI Appraisals in Thales Units from October

2001 to June 2003
 From Level 2 to Level 4
 Approx. 70 assessments using CMM and CMMI in
Thales Units in 2003, of all types (launch, mini,
official,…)
 A pool of 89 corporate assessors from Thales Units,
trained in CMMI and/or CMM and the assessment
method
 Assessment needs are managed by Thales Research
& Technology via a corporate database and using a
defined process
Date, reference

Elements for Cost/Benefit (SW experience)
 Cost of PI primarily attributed to :
 Cost of Engineering Process Group (coord. of actions)
 Cost of WG to define/optimize practices
 Cost of assessments
 Cost of training/deployment of practices
 Benefits :
 Primarily on the ability to meet schedule
 Better requirements elicitation
 Better Software management
 Higher defect detection and lower verification effort
 Non measurable benefits :

 improved morale of the developers
 improved customer satisfaction (fewer post release problems in
Date, reference
the SW)
Reference: Data & Analysis Center for Software /DOD -
http://www.dacs.dtic.mil/techs/roispi2
 ROI : 6 to 1
Average cost and ROI (Thales source)
 For software:
 1.5% of software development effort for SEPG team

 1.5% of software development effort for dissemination
 Key figures : aprox. 30 units; teams from 50 to 300 engineers
 Measured ROI between 3 (minimum) and 6 (maximum)

 period from 1992 to 1997
 Investment in multi-discipline Process Improvement with CMMI:

 2%-3% of development effort in population affected to move
from one level to another
 Factors affecting cost:

 Number of disciplines, number of sites, size of population, range
of different types of project
Date, reference

Contents
 Overview
Date, reference

Management of the improvement initiative
An improvement initiative must be

managed as a project
A customer Sponsorship of the Top Management

Clear identification of business objective and
Objective
improvement scope
Responsibilities A project leader and people involved
Definition / improvement of practices
Activities Deployment
Training
Budget / schedule Estimation / Tracking of cost and delay
Tracking of the actions
Milestones
Regular mini-assessments
Final Acceptance Official assessment
Date, reference
Change of culture and practices on projects and

Product
in the organization

Other Risks and Pitfalls
 Common-sense failure:
 “Compliance-based” process definition
 Lack of focus on business benefit/improvement of
performance
 Standard processes defined based on practices
which already do not work and which are not
tailorable to all business needs
 Change Management
 Buy-in, communication not addressed
 Practitioners not involved
 Changing business-critical processes is risky
Date, reference

Some Ways Process Improvement Can Get Stuck
Shared Skilled Maturity Resources PI Managed

Objectives People Rewarded Provided as a Project Change
Skilled Maturity Resources PI Managed Lack of Clear

People Rewarded Provided as a Project Decisions
Common
Shared Maturity Resources PI Managed
Objectives Rewarded Provided as a Project
Mistakes
repeated
Shared Skilled Resources PI Managed Change

Objectives People Provided as a Project Depends
on Individuals
Shared Skilled Maturity PI Managed Lack of

Objectives People Rewarded as a Project Progress
Date, reference
Shared Skilled Maturity Resources Uncoordinated

Objectives People Rewarded Provided Actions

Summary
 The CMMI model is well established and has a

credible origin
 Thales has been long time advocator of the model
 A culture of Process Improvement is well established
within the organisation
 Process Improvement needs to be managed and co-
ordinated in order to succeed
Date, reference

 Thank You for your attention
Trevor Rudge
Thales Research and Technology
Date, reference

Agile CMMI Summary

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agile CMMI Summary

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CMMI® : St George or the Dragon?

Thales Research and Technology UK

2 Thales Research and Technology UK

3 Thales Research and Technology UK

Process holds the elements together

Major determinants of product cost, Process

4 Thales Research and Technology UK

 Capability Maturity Model (CMM®*) :

"A Capability Maturity Model (CMM) contains the

5 Thales Research and Technology UK

 Use a reference model which is based on practices already

 Use a reference model developed by other industry members

 CMMI® models meet this requirement.

6 Thales Research and Technology UK

7 Thales Research and Technology UK

CMMI Options: * with Integrated Product & Process Development (IPPD)

5 Optimizing CAR: Causal Analysis OID: Organizational

Management CM: Configuration

8 Thales Research and Technology UK

9 Thales Research and Technology UK

 The Boeing Company  Northrop Grumman

10 Thales Research and Technology UK

11 Thales Research and Technology UK

In synergy with ISO 9000, Tickit, EFQM, ...

12 Thales Research and Technology UK

 Highly dependent on current practitioners

 Improvised by practitioners and management

 Not rigorously followed

 Results difficult to predict

 Low visibility into progress and quality

 Compromise of product functionality and quality

 Use of new technology is risky

13 Thales Research and Technology UK

 A disciplined approach for development and

 Defined and continuously improving

 Supported by management and others

 Basis for disciplined use of technology Institutionalized

 Poor integration of disciplines

 Lessons are not learned from the past

15 Thales Research and Technology UK

 Poor integration of disciplines

 Lessons are not learned from the past

16 Thales Research and Technology UK

Defined Thethe processes

17 Thales Research and Technology UK

18 Thales Research and Technology UK

• Engineering community sharing

19 Thales Research and Technology UK

20 Thales Research and Technology UK

 6 SCAMPI Appraisals in Thales Units from October

21 Thales Research and Technology UK

 Non measurable benefits :

 1.5% of software development effort for SEPG team

 Measured ROI between 3 (minimum) and 6 (maximum)

 Investment in multi-discipline Process Improvement with CMMI:

 Factors affecting cost:

23 Thales Research and Technology UK

24 Thales Research and Technology UK

An improvement initiative must be

A customer Sponsorship of the Top Management

Change of culture and practices on projects and

25 Thales Research and Technology UK