Showing posts with label CMMI-ACQ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CMMI-ACQ. Show all posts

Friday, July 31, 2009

Application of the CMMI for Services

I am in the process of preparing a "justification" presentation that talks about why the CMMI is important and how it can be applied. Though I have enough material and data to substantiate this, I don't have data that is contextual. I am looking for data, links, or any input that would point me to where the CMMI was applied to a Staff Augmentation organization or a comparison where I can see how each CMMI constellation (DEV, ACQ, and SVC) can be applied (Development Orgs, Support and Maintenance Org, Outsourcing Org, Staff Augmentation Org).

Though I could be wrong here, but I seriously doubt that the kind of information you seek exists at this point in time. Keep in mind that the CMMI for Services (CMMI-SVC) was only released in late February 2009 and the first appraisals to this constellation cannot occur at least for another 2 or 3 months. So there won’t be any anecdotal evidence or case studies available to provide the information you seek. I would imagine that the first opportunity to see any information of the type will be at the 2010 North American SEPG Conference. And since you are asking about applying the CMMI to a Staff Augmentation organization, the applicable CMMI constellation would the CMMI-SVC. There just isn’t a lot of information about its benefits right now, not enough time has elapsed since its release.

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Why SAM is excluded ?

Why is SAM removed from CMMI L3?

Supplier Agreement Management (SAM) is not excluded from the CMMI-DEV or CMMI-SVC. When you say L3, I assume you mean Maturity Level 3 and SAM is definitely NOT excluded from ML 3. If, however, the Lead Appraiser in working with the organization determines that SAM is not applicable to the work performed by the organization, SAM will be considered Not Applicable to the scope of the appraisal. And that could be at any Maturity Level. Please read previous my posts regarding SAM for more information. http://ppqc.blogspot.com/2009/04/excluding-supplier-agreement-management.html and http://ppqc.blogspot.com/2009/07/cmmi-novice-question.html

Sunday, July 26, 2009

CMMI Novice Question

I would like to know if all the Maturity Level 2 Process Areas must be completed for a Maturity Level 2 appraisal? There are some process areas which are not applicable to our organization.

For the CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV) there is only one Process Area (PA) that can be designated Not Applicable (N/A), SAM. Therefore, at a minimum, REQM, PP, PMC, MA, PPQA, and CM are required for a Maturity Level 2 (ML 2) appraisal. And if the organization has outsourced some work, then SAM is also applicable.

I find it hard to believe that you can state that one or more of these PAs are not applicable to your organization. Every project has requirements to manage from the janitor to the President. Everyone works on a project. You just have to define what a project is. And then you manage the project. Everyone can define specific measures that can be used to manage the project. Everyone has some sort of configuration items or documents that have to be managed. And everyone needs some sort of objective evaluation of the process and project compliance. For a small organization, you may have combined one or more of these PAs under one person. But that does not mean these PAs are not applicable.

Now if you said that you had problems with the engineering PAs (RD, TS, PI, VER, and VAL), then I would suggest that the CMMI-DEV may not be the appropriate model constellation for your use and you should look at the CMMI for Services (CMMI-SVC) or CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ).

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Levying CMMI Requirements on Your Suppliers

I would like to know whether or not an acquirer can specify a CMMI Maturity Level (ML) as a requirement in a call for tenders or invitation to public bidding. What the ML is required? What is the domain ? and for what kind of projects?

The answer is yes. The acquirer can specify any requirements they want the vendors to meet. In my experience, I have seen acquirers specifying that the bidders be either at ML 2 or ML 3. What this means though is that the acquirer has done its homework and appropriately determined the necessary Maturity Level for the vendor to support the acquirer’s business and quality goals and objectives. There should be a good match between the ML of the acquirer and the ML of the vendor, to work well it may be best if both organizations are at the same ML. Otherwise, there can be problems.

As the acquirer, you probably would find benefit from implementing the CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ). The CMMI-ACQ provides a lot of guidance for tenders and contracts that meet the acquirer’s needs.

Friday, April 10, 2009

Excluding Supplier Agreement Management

Page 440 of CMMI-DEV 1.2 model clearly states that: "SAM process area does not directly address arrangements in which the supplier is integrated into the project team and uses the same processes and reports to the same management as the product developers (for example, integrated teams)."

This statement opens room for some Lead Appraisers to trigger the default button: "SAM is out." But the paragraph continues with the following statement: "Typically, these situations are handled by other processes or functions, possibly external to the project, though some of the specific practices of this process area may be useful in managing the formal agreement with such a supplier."

In my oppinion, not considering SAM may incur problems in the future because you may be postponing the elaboration of a mature way to handle suppliers and contracts and this will be necessary when the organization evolves to higher maturity levels. And, of course, it will be necessary to survive in a global IT world driven by strong and stronger supplier/acquirer relationships.

In my country, only 2 out of 16 organizations who published their Maturity Level 2 appraisals considered SAM in their scope. And, guess what? Many of these organizations use a high number of contractors in their development phases. So, what led them to exclude SAM?

It is important to understand the intent of SAM. If you are augmenting your staff by having a supplier provide people and these people then act, for all intents and purposes, as your employees, then SAM does not apply. Basically, they are following your processes and not managing any of the work on their own, you are managing the work. However, if you give the supplier a chunk of work that they can manage by themselves using their own processes, then SAM applies. So both the organization and the Lead Appraiser need to be aware that if the relationship changes with the supplier, then SAM may move from being N/A to in scope for an appraisal. And you raise a good point, whether or not the Lead Appraiser determines if SAM is in or out of scope, the organization should be aware of the necessary practices it should have in place to manage a supplier.

And if the organization wants to become more sophisticated in managing suppliers, they should be using the CMMI-ACQ.

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Integrated SCAMPI

I am faced with a problem with determining which CMMI to use (CMMI-DEV, CMMI-SVC, or CMMI-ACQ) for an in-house IT Department that performs all three types of functions for the organization. I face the following questions:
  1. Is there an integrated SCAMPI for all three models held together? Or is the scope is simply determined by adding different PAs from different models? In this case, against what model will the ratings be announced?
  2. What about the cost paid to the SEI? Is it calculated differently for such a SCAMPI?
  3. What about exclusions if all PAs from these three models that are not fully applicable? Is there a way other than pursuing Continuous Representation?
  4. Can you recommend any research work done already on integrating the three model for designing and implementing the OSSP?
I will be greatful for your help and support...

As a first step you should hire an SEI-certified Lead Appraiser, preferably in all three constellations, to provide you the proper advice as to which constellation is appropriate for your organization.

I would only recommend that an organization use the CMMI-ACQ if their primary focus was acquiring products and services from vendors. The CMMI-DEV and CMMI-SVC both have the Supplier Agreement Management Process Area, so either constellation will work if acquisition is not the primary focus of the organization.

Here are my answers to your specific questions:

  1. It is possible to conduct blended SCAMPI A appraisals that cover more than one constellation. But your Lead Appraiser will have to work with your organization and the SEI on how best to perform the blended appraisal and determine your Capability or Maturity Level ratings.
  2. There are NO fees paid to the SEI by the organization for any appraisal. Any appraisal costs are negotiated between you and your Lead Appraiser.
  3. The determination of the appraisal scope is performed jointly with your Lead Appraiser when planning the appraisal. The appraisal scope specifies the representation and the Process Areas being evaluated.
  4. I am unaware of any reported results using blended constellations. Though Mike Phillips from the SEI has said that blended SCAMPIs are permissible. I suggest that you contact the SEI and ask for this kind of information, if it exists.

CMMI-SVC and Emergence of Open Organizations

Emergence of Open Organization- when will it happen? LinkedIn + Google+Sourceforge+Newscale + Visa
I foresee Newscale/ Pinky/SEI coming up with a master service catalogue that could be integrated with Google where any Group member can have his own service catalog in his profile. The Group Service catalog could well be an Organization's service catalog. Probably any individual would say he has his office is in Yahoo!, Google etc and may add that he works for a particular social enterprise/many enterprises. I also feel that some governmental procedures or a global standard will evolve for the governance of Open companies. My question is does the CMMI-SVC address this?

What you are asking about is a virtual office environment and the tools to enable this environment. There are two practices in the CMMI that address work environments: OPD SP 1.6 Establish and maintain work environment standards and IPM SP 1.3 Establish and maintain the project’s work environment based on the organization’s work environment standards. Since both OPD and IPM are Core Process Areas (PAs), they are common to all CMMI constellations CMMI-DEV, CMMI-ACQ, and CMMI-SVC. So your virtual office concept can work with any of the three constellations.

Monday, March 9, 2009

CMMI for Aquisition

I am looking for standards for aquisitions and outsourcing. I heard that there is a CMMI standard for aquisitions? Can anyone confirm this? Also is there any standard for outsourcing?

Yes, there is a CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ) and it was released in November 2007. You can find out more information about the CMMI-ACQ and detailed answers to your questions at http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/07.reports/07tr017.html

Thursday, January 29, 2009

CMMI v1.3 Query

I have few questions about the release of CMMI v1.3 expected next year.
  1. We are implementing CMMI v1.2 level 5 this year (first quarter). When the SEI releases v1.3 will there be any changes again in expectation and understanding as it was done in v1.2 for the High Maturity practices.
  2. How will the release of v1.3 affect the ongoing and planned appraisals based on v1.2?
  3. When v1.3 is released next year, can a company directly go from ML5 v1.1 to ML5 v1.3? If so,what will be the impacts?
  4. If the v1.3 updates all three constellations (CMMI-DEV, CMMI-ACQ, and CMMI-SVC) then appraisals based on v1.2 will again be 'NON COMPLIANT with the latest CMMI model version. How will the SEI accomodate the differences?
  5. Is there any pre-release material available?

These are good questions, but they are questions that can only be addressed by the SEI at this time. The SEI Partners and Lead Appraisers only know what the SEI told us in October, which was in general terms. We don’t have any specific information on the contents of v1.3. All that we know is that v1.3 is triggered by the changes necessary to the core CMMI framework to accommodate CMMI-ACQ and CMMI-SVC. The SEI is also include changes to the HM PAs. There will most likely be other changes rolled in as well. But as v1.3 is probably a year in the future, it doesn’t help to speculate on the impacts of v1.3 today.

As with previous model updates, I would fully expect that when the SEI releases v1.3 that there will be a sunset period for v1.2 to address the kinds of issues that you have brought up.

For question #1, it is my impression that there is no change in the HM expectations, just clearer statements of the HM expectations.

And keep in mind that all CMMI Ratings are only good for three years and if the results are posted on the SEI’s site, the model version used for the appraisal is indicated. So for question #4, the appraisal results are not invalidated because the model is updated. It is incumbent upon the organization to remain current on model changes and be prepared to be appraised to the correct version at the renewal date.

The SEI also just made this announcement:

CMMI Version 1.3 News

The Software Engineering Institute is now planning Version 1.3 of the CMMI Product Suite. CMMI Version 1.3 will include updates to the models in all three constellations: Development, Acquisition, and Services. These updates will synchronize the architecture and content of the models as members of the CMMI Product Suite and clarify the high maturity material in all three models. Change requests submitted before March 2, 2009 for CMMI-DEV, CMMI-ACQ, and CMMI-SVC will be reviewed as part of this project. As plans are finalized, more information about CMMI Version 1.3 will become available on the SEI website. The date of the Version 1.3 release is not yet definite, but is likely in 2010.

If you wish to submit a change request for a CMMI model, download and complete the appropriate form and email it to
cmmi-cr@sei.cmu.edu. For more information about the CMMI User Feedback process and change request forms, see http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/models/change-requests.html.

In addition, the SEI announced today a webinar on v1.3 scheduled for Feb 10, 2009.

Special Event in the SEI Webinar Series: CMMI Version 1.3 Product Suite

Join us for a Webinar on February 10

Presented by Mike Konrad and Rusty Young

In this webinar session, Mike Konrad, manager of the CMMI Model Team and CMMI Chief Architect, and Rusty Young, manager of the SCAMPI Appraisal Team, will discuss CMMI Version 1.3. Version 1.3 will include updates to the entire CMMI Product Suite and will focus on, but not be limited to:

  1. Clarity of high maturity
  2. More effective generic practices
  3. Appraisal efficiencies
  4. Commonality across the constellations: Development, Acquisition, and Services

This webinar will be the final in-depth communication on Version 1.3 before the change request period is closed. Change requests that are submitted before March 2, 2009 for CMMI-DEV, CMMI-ACQ, and CMMI-SVC constellations will be reviewed as part of this project. As plans are finalized, more information about CMMI Version 1.3 will become available on the SEI website. The date of the Version 1.3 release is not yet definite, but is likely in 2010. SPACES ARE LIMITED! SO, REGISTER NOW!
Title:

Special Event in the SEI Webinar Series: CMMI Version 1.3 Product Suite
Date:
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Time:
9:30 AM - 12:30 PM EST
After registering you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the Webinar.

System RequirementsPC-based attendeesRequired: Windows® 2000, XP Home, XP Pro, 2003 Server, Vista
Macintosh®-based attendeesRequired: Mac OS® X 10.4 (Tiger®) or newer

Space is limited.Reserve your Webinar seat now at:
https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/258250327

Thursday, January 8, 2009

What is the Latest News on CMMI-ACQ and CMMI-SVC?

Are there many organizations using the CMMI-ACQ at the moment and what kind of feedback do you have - good or bad?

There doesn’t appear to be much interest in this constellation at this point. I have taught the Intro to CMMI-ACQ supplement one time in the past 12 months. The students were from the US Navy and consultants supporting the Navy. They were very interested in the material and felt that the information was very useful. I think that the CMMI-ACQ is slowly gaining momentum. It is just my perception here in the US that there is not a whole lot of interest in the CMMI-ACQ. There should be a lot of interest in the government sector where most everything is outsourced or acquired. But I just don’t see the interest yet. We heard at the Lead Appraiser workshop in October that Maggie Glover had led the first SCAMPI A using the CMMI-ACQ for an organization in Taiwan. It may take some time to build interest in the CMMI-ACQ. The constellation that appears to be of much more interest and a broader applicability is the CMMI-SVC.

if you are a interested in a comparison of the CMMI- DEV and CMMI-ACQ please visit this site http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/models/ACQ-v12-comparetoDEV.html

Is there any news on the CMMI-SVC? I am interested in finding out when the final report comes out.

The CMMI-SVC is scheduled for release in March 2009. Pre-release training is currently available to SEI Partners and will be open to everyone after the March 2009 release.

Monday, September 22, 2008

Who Owns the Process?

A company/organization entirely outsources its software development to another company. That's their business model. The developers working for the company whose name appears on their paycheck work for the client in every way except for who signs the paycheck (so to speak).

The entire development effort (client and developers) implements CMMI.

IF BOTH the leaders of the client company AND the developer company take part in the process efforts, e.g., GP2.1, GP2.7, GP2.8, GP2.10, GP3.2, et al. can the SCAMPI be done such that both OUs are delineated? Can BOTH organizations lay claim to a rating?

I think the key element comes down to the definition of the Organizational Unit. And you imply in your scenario that there are two OUs. One OU has outsourced the engineering work and the other OU is performing the engineering work. Given the OU definitions, I think that this scenario indicates the need for two SCAMPI appraisals. One for the client using the CMMI-ACQ since it has outsourced the development work and one for the development organization using the CMMI-DEV.

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

Is CMMI only for Software Companies?

Can the CMMI be applied only for software developments companies, or can systems integration companies also derive benefit from it ? What I mean by "systems integration companies" are organizations who engage in selling IT solutions including sofware and hardware as a solution.

The CMMI is not a software only model. By the end of this year, the SEI will have released three CMMI constellations: CMMI for Development, CMMI for Acquisition, and CMMI for Services. The Development and Acquisition constellations are currently available, the Services constellation is due to be released this Fall. The CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV) covers hardware, software, and systems engineering and so it will apply to systems integration companies as you have defined the term.

Thursday, June 5, 2008

Applicability of the CMMI to a Volunteer Association

I'm hoping all y'all can help ... one of the volunteer associations that I am involved with is considering developing an organizational assessment model to evaluate project management maturity or competence. I'm looking for some market info/competitive analysis.

  1. If you are familiar with CMM and CMMI, do you feel that these models are adequate to assess non-software organizations?
  2. Do you have direct, personal experience with any of the existing models? Was it good or bad?
  3. If you don't have direct experience, do you have any secondhand information about any of the models?
  4. What models are you aware of? What do you know of their strengths
    and weaknesses?
  5. Has your current employer expressed any interest in an assessment? Why or why not?

First off, let me set some things straight about the CMM and CMMI. The CMM is no longer valid for use as of December 31, 2005. It was replaced by the CMMI. Since its introduction in December 2000, the CMMI has evolved into what the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) is calling a group of constellations. The first constellation is the CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV). The second constellation is the CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ) that was released last Fall. And the third constellation is the CMMI for Services (CMMI-SVC) that will be released towards the end of 2008. There is a core set of 16 Process Areas that are common to all constellations and the core includes the Project Management Process Areas of Requirements Management (REQM), Project Planning (PP), Project Monitoring and Control (PMC), Integrated Project Management (IPM), Risk Management (RSKM), and Quantitative Project Management (QPM).

REQM, PP, PMC, IPM, RSKM, and QPM apply to any type of organization, not just software organizations. The CMMI-DEV is for software engineering, hardware engineering, and/or systems engineering organizations. The CMMI-ACQ is for organizations who have outsourced their development and/or maintenance work and are just managing their subcontractors. The CMMI-SVC is for organizations who provide services.

REQM, PP, and PMC are the basic project management Process Areas (Maturity Level 2). IPM and RSKM build on REQM, PP, and PMC to enable the Project Manager to proactively manage the project (Maturity Level 3). And QPM builds on REQM, PP, PMC, IPM, and RSKM to allow the Project Manager to quantitatively manage the project and statistically manage selected sub-processes to achieve the organization’s and project’s quality and process performance objectives.

It might take a little bit of thought and discussion to determine how these Process Areas can be used in a volunteer association, but using the CMMI would be a great place to start
.

Monday, May 12, 2008

CMMI Updates from the SEI

Last week I participated in the workshop at the Software Engineering Institute in Pittsburgh to develop questions for the Lead Appraiser certification exam that is planned to be administered for the first time in October 2008. To kick off the workshop, Mike Phillips/Program Manager of the CMMI, gave us the latest information on a number of topics that I want to summarize for you here.
  1. The purpose of this workshop was to help increase the professional aspect of the Lead Appraiser profession and it represents a maturation of the profession.
  2. The first opportunity to use the Lead Appraiser test will be at the Lead Appraiser Workshop in Vancouver, WA in October 2008. All Lead Appraisers must take and pass the exam and there will be a one-year window for taking the exam.
  3. The release of CMMI v1.3 will not be very long after the release of CMMI-SVC constellation, which is currently planned for March 2009. The SEI is trying to get it out sooner, possibly as early as January 2009.
  4. v1.3 will include a number of changes resulting from developing CMMI-ACQ and CMMI-SVC. There are two IPPD practices for ACQ, one in OPD and one in IPM, that are now mandatory. The SEI also wants to include the updated High Maturity material in this release. The intent is to bring all three constellations into a greater harmony. The plan is to release v1.3 by the end of 2009.
  5. The strategy for the Introduction to the CMMI class will also be changing somewhat. At some unspecified time in the future, the new class will consist of a 3-day generic course applicable to any constellation, and then 1-day supplemental classes for each constellation. The generic class is expected to be for everyone and the supplemental classes will be for appraisal team members only.
  6. Someone in the audience asked Mike Phillips if the SEI is going to consider hardware engineering as a separate discipline. His answer was that the SEI is not trying to differentiate hardware engineering at this time. They are backing away from discipline-specific distinctions.
  7. Mike Phillips said that there are ongoing discussions on future constellations. Possibly one for manufacturing and another for operations. But these constellations, if they were to materialize, are way off into the future.
  8. When v1.3 is released near December 2009, the SEI will issues three TRs, one for each constellation.
  9. v1.3 was approved as an idea by the SEI Steering Group one month ago. The next steps are in work, but it is still too early in the process to be definitive.

Monday, April 14, 2008

CMMI-ACQ - Agreement Management

Agreement Management (AM) is a Maturity Level 2 (ML 2) Process Area (PA) in the CMMI-ACQ. Basically this PA is a more robust treatment of the CMMI-DEV PA Supplier Agreement Management (SAM) Specific Goal 2 (SG 2), Satisfy Supplier Agreements. The Specific Goal and most of the Specific Practices have the same titles between the two PAs. However, the details are quite different.

AM only has one Specific Goal - The terms of the supplier agreement are met by both the acquirer and the supplier. SAM uses the term project instead of acquirer. This difference means that AM is applied in a broader sense than SAM. SAM focusses on the project's needs for acquiring a product or service from a supplier. AM focusses on the acquirer, which may be
· Procurement
· Purchasing
· Outsourcing
· Supply chain
· Buyer
· Contracting
· Logistics
· Supply sourcing
etc.
Mike Phillips/SEI said in the CMMI-ACQ class that he has a list of 17 different terms for acquirer.

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

CMMI for Acquisition Process Areas

There are 6 CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ) Process Areas (PAs) unique to this new constellation: Agreement Management (AM), Acquisition Requirements Development (ARD), Acquisition Technical Management (ATM), Acquisition Validation (AVAL), Acquisition Verification (AVER), and Solicitation and Supplier Agreement Development (SSAD). AM, ARD, and SSAD are Maturity Level 2 PAs and ATM, AVAL, and AVER are Maturity Level 3 PAs.

In addition to these six new PAs, there are other changes at the Specific Practice level in Project Planning (PP), Project Monitoring and Control (PMC), Integrated Project Management (IPM), and Organizational Process Definition (OPD).

PP SP 1.1 - Establish and maintain the acquisition strategy

PP SP 2.7 - Plan transition to operations and support (the addition of this SP makes the old SP 2.7 now SP 2.8)

PMC SP 1.8 - Monitor transition to operations and support

OPD SP 1.7 - Establsh and maintain organizational rules and guidelines for the structure, formation, and operation of integrated teams

IPM SP 1.6 - Establish and maintain integrated teams

The difficult concept to understand if your background is in the CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV)is that every core PA is interpreted in the context of the acquirer's processes.

When looking at the Continuous Representation for CMMI-ACQ the category Acqusition replaces the category Engineering from the CMMI-DEV constellation. And the other change is that Requirements Management (REQM) is now included in the Project Management category.

And on a final note, it is possible to perform a blended appraisal CMMI-DEV and CMMI-ACQ.

Friday, April 4, 2008

CMMI for Acquisition

PPQC Adds Delivery of CMMI-ACQ Training and Appraisals to Its Offerings

I am pleased to announce that PPQC is now authorized by the Software Engineering Institute as a partner provider for the CMMI-ACQ, both as a provider of the CMMI-ACQ training class and also SCAMPI A, B, and C appraisals to the CMMI-ACQ. Visit these links for more information PPQC Services and PPQC Training.

The CMMI-ACQ version 1.2 was released in November 2007 and it provides guidance for the application of CMMI best practices by the acquirer. Best practices in the model focus on activities for initiating and managing the acquisition of products and services that meet the needs of the customer. Although suppliers may provide artifacts useful to the processes addressed in CMMI-ACQ, the focus of the model is on the processes of the acquirer. CMMI-ACQ integrates bodies of knowledge that are essential for an acquirer.

By integrating these bodies of knowledge, CMMI-ACQ provides a comprehensive set of best practices for acquiring products and services. CMMI-DEV may be treated as a reference for supplier-executed activities for systems engineering, software development, and hardware design work in an acquisition initiative. In those cases where the acquirer also has a role as a product or service developer (e.g., taking responsibility for the first few layers of product development and integration), CMMI-DEV (in particular the Requirements Development, Technical Solution, and Product Integration Process Areas) should also be used to improve the acquirer's product or service development processes.

Tuesday, April 1, 2008

Changes to Intro to CMMI Training and Appraisals for CMMI-ACQ

When taking the CMMI-ACQ upgrade training class from the SEI on March 21, there were a number of important changes that will impact CMMI Instructors, Lead Appraisers, and organizations that I think should be made available. No doubt over the next few months more information will be communicated by the SEI.

The FERPA form has been a pain for instructors because you have to be sure to collect them from each student and submit them to the SEI. In the past the SEI has stated that the FERPA forms were required by Carnegie Melon. In addition, the FERPA form is required so the results can be input to SAS and then made available to the Lead Appraiser when planning an appraisal.

The SEI made some small incremental additions to the core 16 Process Areas to accommodate ACQ. These changes are to the informative material. The CMMI Constellation architecture allows the SEI the freedom to tailor the core PAs at the sub-practice level. The sub-practice changes are posted on the web.

There is no difference in SCAMPI appraisals for the CMMI-ACQ. The SAS is almost ready to use for CMMI-ACQ.

On-line training for CMMI-ACQ is being developed with blended learning and will be available in May at about the same cost. The intent is that students can take the class online and then the instructor will schedule an online meeting with the class to discuss the material.

The CMMI-ACQ contains a new feature in the Process Areas. Typical Supplier Deliverables. This new feature ≠ deliverable artifacts. The Typical Supplier Deliverables are there to remind the acquirer of typical work products the acquirer might produce

The core Process Areas have some differences and this is intentional. To quote Rusty Young “Informative NOT Ignorative!” so the changes are important to note.

The CMMI-ACQ class will be a one-day add on training class. The current plan is to deliver the three-day class ( a generalist course) followed by a single day supplemental class in either DEV, ACQ, or SVC. The three-day CMMI class is for most people and the one-day supplemental is intended for Appraisal Team Members. This new structure will be available in about a year from now, March 2009.

When conducting a SCAMPI for a combined DEV and ACQ appraisal use the Continuous Representation if the overlap of the two constellations becomes a strength. You should be able to enter CMMI-DEV plus some ACQ PAs that best fit in the OTHER category in SAS.

The SEI relabled the categories in the Continuous Representation for CMMI-ACQ. REQM is included in Project Management.

And, finally, comparisons of the CMMI-ACQ to CMMI-DEV are provided at
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/models/ACQ-v12-comparetoDEV.html . Go to the bottom of the page for chapter-by-chapter detailed comparisons and to download PDF copies.
There may be a CMMI v1.2a update released after all the CMMI constellations have been released, perhaps by the end of 2009. And it may be called v1.3 instead.