Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI)

consider all aspects of the process context, such as project size and duration, organizational
culture, application domain, customer market, and so on, in determining the appropriateness
and sufficiency of indicators. For example, the level of detail necessary for a work breakdown
structure will differ widely for a 1-person, 2-week maintenance effort as opposed to a
100-person, multi-year, mission-critical, new product development.
An example of how PIIs for each of these types might be used in verifying implementation of
a model practice is depicted in Figure I-1.
PP SP1.1
Establish
Indirect work product:
Minutes of meetings at which
WBS was generated or used to
develop project estimates
Direct work product:
Top-level WBS, with revision history
Task descriptions
Work product descriptions
a top-level work breakdown structure (WBS)
for estimating the scope of the project.
Indirect work product:
Project estimates aligned
with WBS elements
Affirmation:
How is the WBS used?
How are estimates generated?
Figure I-1:Example of PII Use
Appraisal teams collect and organize data according to these indicator types. The SCAMPI
method defines rules and guidelines (described in “Data Collection, Rating, and Reporting”
below) about the amount of data that must be collected for each of these indicator types. A
combination of objective evidence according to these indicator types is necessary to corroborate
multiple sources of data that may be available for each practice, and to obtain confidence
in the accuracy of the data collected. For reasons that are evident, an over-reliance on one
type of objective evidence or another is undesirable. Too much dependence on artifacts could
result in the perception that the appraisal was a “paper review” and not truly indicative of
organizational and/or project behavior. An over-reliance on affirmations could be criticized as
not truly objective or repeatable. Therefore, the SCAMPI method requires a balance across
these types of objective evidence.
Appendix B contains additional detailed discussion of PIIs and indicator-based appraisals.
Data Collection, Rating, and Reporting
The appraisal team follows a consensus-based, structured process to synthesize and transform
information collected from the sources described in “Objective Evidence Sources” on page I-
I-26 CMU/SEI-2001-HB-001