Systematic process improvement using ISO 9001:2000 and CMMI

More documents

Recommendations

Info

240 Appraisal/Registration CMM ® , CMMI ® , or EIA 731. By knowing its weaknesses, the organization can prioritize improvement plans. A second appraisal objective is benchmarking—knowledge of the relative standing of organizational process capability as compared to the rest of the industry or field. A third objective is formal certification that can be used as a mark of excellence recognized by both users and competitors. Obviously, all organizations want to minimize the time spent preparing for and executing the appraisal while still producing high-quality results. Unfortunately, as the models become larger and more complex, more time is needed to analyze organizational processes for compliance. Despite these difficulties, the selected method must provide consistent and repeatable results without depending on the appraisal leader or the appraisal team but instead relying solely on the examination of objective evidence. 8.1 SCAMPI SM The SCAMPI SM method was developed over several years in parallel with the CMMI ® . It is part of the CMMI ® product suite, which includes models, appraisal materials, and training materials. 8.1.1 Some history Several process assessment methodologies were developed in the late 1980s to determine how well an organization’s processes complied with a selected model. Some of those methodologies were developed for specific models or purposes, most notably ISO registration or the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. In addition, many professional societies developed benchmarking techniques to determine how well organizations comply with their own specific requirements. For software, the software process assessment (SPA) method was developed by the SEI in the 1980s. This was the precursor to several current assessment methodologies. The SPA method provided good results in a short time— typically, 1 week of documentation reviews and interviews with the organizational personnel. However, it had some problems with accuracy and repeatability. There was a need for an appraisal method that had greater consistency and implementation rigor so the results could be used not only for process improvement but also for source selection and project monitoring. The current SCAMPI SM method, version 1.1 [1], released in December 2001, has evolved from earlier appraisal methods. It satisfies the Appraisal Requirements for CMMI ® (ARC) [2]. ARC, in turn, has its roots in the CMM ®
8.1 SCAMPI SM 241 Appraisal Framework (CAF) [3]. Both of these documents were developed to capture a set of requirements for appraisal methods, thereby enabling the design of appraisal methods for the respective models. Because the CMMI ® contains an expanded set of models in two representations, its appraisal method had to accommodate those special aspects. Additional influences on the ARC requirements came from the EIA/IS 731.2 appraisal method [4], and the need to be compatible with the emerging international standard ISO/IEC 15504 (known as SPICE during its development and trial use) [5]. SCAMPI SM itself is quite similar to the CBA IPI [6], a CAF-compliant method currently in wide use for assessing software process improvement. The CMM ® has an additional appraisal method—the Software Capability Evaluation SM (SCE SM ), version 3.0 [7], which is used mainly as an aid in source selection and project monitoring. However, many organizations use the SCE SM method instead of the CBA IPI method for evaluation of their process improvement initiatives. The SCAMPI SM method is designed for both assessment and evaluation: Appraisal encompasses both assessment and evaluation. With publication of the CMMI ® , SCAMPI SM will replace both the CBA IPI and SCE SM methods. Because of the size of the model and different purposes for which the method can be used, the SEI postulated three classes of methods that exhibit various degrees of compliance with the ARC requirements. The factors to consider when selecting one of the classes are [2] as follows: • The desired degree of confidence in the appraisal outcomes; • The need to generate ratings; • Appraisal cost and duration. Class A appraisals must satisfy all ARC requirements, whereas class B appraisals satisfy a subset of those requirements, and class C appraisals satisfy a subset of class B requirements. Most of the differences are in the rigor of reviewing, validating, and corroborating the objective evidence, and in generating ratings. Only class A methods produce ratings. Class B methods are effective for initial assessments where the purpose of the investigation is the determination of major weaknesses and initiation of process improvements. Class C methods are known as ‘‘quick look’’ or gap analysis methods and are usually implemented before a formal appraisal. Many organizations periodically use such quick look methods to get an indication of the progress of their process improvement effort.
Page 3 and 4:
Systematic Process Improvement Usin
Page 5 and 6:
Systematic Process Improvement Usin
Page 7 and 8:
To our wives, Mirta and Susan, and
Page 9 and 10:
Contents Foreword . . . . . . . . .
Page 11 and 12:
Contents ix 5.6 Summary of ISO requ
Page 13 and 14:
Foreword As we began the work in 19
Page 15:
Foreword xiii tion’s investment i
Page 18 and 19:
xvi Preface Audience for this book
Page 20 and 21:
xviii Preface organizations have pu
Page 23 and 24:
CHAPTER 1 Contents 1.1 Role of fram
Page 25 and 26:
Introduction 3 Figure 1.1 Framework
Page 27 and 28:
1.2 Process improvement approaches
Page 29 and 30:
1.3 Synergy 7 Figure 1.2 Systematic
Page 31 and 32:
1.3 Synergy 9 • Educated and well
Page 33:
1.3 Synergy 11 References [1] Shear
Page 36 and 37:
14 Process Improvement • Identifi
Page 38 and 39:
16 Process Improvement life-cycle m
Page 40 and 41:
18 Process Improvement Although the
Page 42 and 43:
20 Process Improvement Figure 2.2 I
Page 44 and 45:
22 Process Improvement To help reso
Page 46 and 47:
24 Process Improvement improvement
Page 48 and 49:
26 Process Improvement 2. Analyze r
Page 50 and 51:
28 Process Improvement Table 2.1 Im
Page 53 and 54:
CHAPTER 3 Contents 3.1 Relationship
Page 55 and 56:
3.1 Relationships between framework
Page 57 and 58:
3.3 CMM ® for software 35 by its u
Page 59 and 60:
3.3 CMM ® for software 37 Table 3.
Page 61 and 62:
3.3 CMM ® for software 39 Figure 3
Page 63 and 64:
3.3 CMM ® for software 41 Figure 3
Page 65 and 66:
3.4 ISO TR 15504 43 • Defect Prev
Page 67 and 68:
3.4 ISO TR 15504 45 Table 3.5 ISO T
Page 69 and 70:
3.5 EIA/IS-731 47 Table 3.7 Managem
Page 71 and 72:
3.5 EIA/IS-731 49 Table 3.8 EIA/IS-
Page 73 and 74:
3.5 EIA/IS-731 51 Table 3.9 EIA/IS-
Page 75 and 76:
3.6 FAA-iCMM ® 53 of the model (su
Page 77 and 78:
3.6 FAA-iCMM ® 55 Table 3.12 Capab
Page 79 and 80:
3.7 Summary 57 Table 3.13 Maturity
Page 81 and 82:
CHAPTER 4 Contents 4.1 ISO 9001:200
Page 83 and 84:
4.1 ISO 9001:2000 61 the current st
Page 85 and 86:
4.1 ISO 9001:2000 63 Principle 4: p
Page 87 and 88:
4.1 ISO 9001:2000 65 agement level
Page 89 and 90:
4.1 ISO 9001:2000 67 for understand
Page 91 and 92:
4.1 ISO 9001:2000 69 • Which tool
Page 93 and 94:
4.1 ISO 9001:2000 71 responsibility
Page 95 and 96:
4.1 ISO 9001:2000 73 It is often sa
Page 97 and 98:
4.1 ISO 9001:2000 75 covery of erro
Page 99 and 100:
4.1 ISO 9001:2000 77 measured, and
Page 101 and 102:
4.2 CMMI ® 79 resistance to this p
Page 103 and 104:
4.2 CMMI ® 81 and staged represent
Page 105 and 106:
4.2 CMMI ® 83 Figure 4.4 Continuou
Page 107 and 108:
4.2 CMMI ® 85 Table 4.6 Category C
Page 109 and 110:
4.2 CMMI ® 87 Table 4.7 Generic Go
Page 111 and 112:
4.2 CMMI ® 89 Table 4.8 Generic Go
Page 113 and 114:
4.2 CMMI ® 91 Why is this importan
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
4.2 CMMI ® 97 • Identifying and
Page 121 and 122:
4.2 CMMI ® 99 uous representation
Page 123 and 124:
4.2 CMMI ® 101 SG 2 SP 2.1-1 SP 2.
Page 125 and 126:
4.2 CMMI ® 103 Interfaces between
Page 127 and 128:
4.2 CMMI ® 105 SP 2.6-1 SP 2.7-1 S
Page 129 and 130:
4.2 CMMI ® 107 SG 1 SP 1.1-1 SP 1.
Page 131 and 132:
4.2 CMMI ® 109 Why is this importa
Page 133 and 134:
4.2 CMMI ® 111 from business objec
Page 135 and 136:
4.2 CMMI ® 113 SG 1 SP 1.1-1 SP 1.
Page 137 and 138:
4.2 CMMI ® 115 SG 3 SP 3.1-1 SP 3.
Page 139 and 140:
4.2 CMMI ® 117 Why is this importa
Page 141:
4.2 CMMI ® 119 [5] Quality managem
Page 144 and 145:
122 ISO 9001:2000 and CMMI ® Syner
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
154 Transitioning from Legacy Stand
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213: 190 Transitioning from Legacy Stand
Page 228 and 229: 206 Approaches Using ISO-CMMI ® Sy
Page 261: CHAPTER 8 8.1 SCAMPI SM Contents 8.
Page 265 and 266: 8.1 SCAMPI SM 243 within the select
Page 267 and 268: 8.1 SCAMPI SM 245 Figure 8.2 Charac
Page 269 and 270: 8.1 SCAMPI SM 247 • Organizationa
Page 271 and 272: 8.1 SCAMPI SM 249 relevant stakehol
Page 273 and 274: 8.1 SCAMPI SM 251 time in the appra
Page 275 and 276: 8.2 ISO 9001:2000 registration proc
Page 281 and 282: 8.3 TickIT 259 Figure 8.5 TickIT st
Page 283 and 284: 8.5 Summary 261 in Chapter 7, achie
Page 285 and 286: CHAPTER 9 Contents Document Mapping
Page 287 and 288: 9.1 Mapping: ISO 9001:2000 to the C
Page 289 and 290: 9.1 Mapping: ISO 9001:2000 to the C
Page 291 and 292: 9.2 Inverse mapping: CMMI ® to ISO
Page 303: 9.2 Inverse mapping: CMMI ® to ISO
Page 306 and 307: 284 Acronyms FAM FAA-iCMM ® Apprai
Page 308 and 309: 286 Acronyms SCAMPI SM Standard CMM
Page 311 and 312: Index A audience, this book, xv-xvi
Page 313 and 314:
Index 291 design and development, 1
Page 315 and 316:
Index 293 technical solution (TS),
Page 317 and 318:
Index 295 ISO 9001:2000 transition,
Page 319 and 320:
Index 297 organizational innovation
Page 321 and 322:
Index 299 S supplier agreement mana
show all

Systematic process improvement using ISO 9001:2000 and CMMI

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?