I don't find the term Engineering Process Group or acronym EPG in the CMMI. The OPF PA where EPG was defined earlier has the reference of 'process group' in GP 2.4 and elsewhere. Is there any specific reason for which the word 'engineering' was elminated from the model?
I don’t think the EPG or SEPG for that matter was ever referenced in the CMMI. Though I could be wrong. I just checked the v1.1 book and it doesn’t mention the EPG or SEPG in OPF GP 2.4. In point of fact, there is no difference in OPF GP 2.4 between v1.1 and v1.2. You are correct in referencing GP 2.4 because that is the GP that expects a group such as the EPG or SEPG to be assigned responsibility for OPF. However, the reason the CMMI does not mention these two groups is because you don’t need a group named the EPG or SEPG to perform the OPF activities. You can call the group whatever name you choose, you just need to assign the OPF responsibilities to someone or some group. And a group can be one person.
Showing posts with label EPG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EPG. Show all posts
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Process Improvement - A Twelve Step Process
1. We admitted we were powerless over quality/on-time delivery/estimates/project management/etc. – that our projects had become unmanageable.
2. We came to believe that a model greater than ourselves (the CMMI) could restore us to sanity.
3. We made a decision to turn our processes and procedures over to the care of Software Engineering Institute.
4. We conducted a searching and fearless gap analysis of our organization.
5. We admitted to our Lead Appraiser, to ourselves, and to our executive management the exact nature of our process weaknesses and gaps.
6. We were entirely ready to have our Lead Appraiser help us address these weaknesses and gaps.
7. We humbly asked our Lead Appraiser to help us remove our weaknesses.
8. We made a list of all projects that had suffered because of our bad practices, and became willing to take corrective actions to address the issues, as applicable.
9. We made direct modifications to our processes wherever possible, except when to do so would jeopardize the success a project.
10. We continued to appraise the organization, and when we had weaknesses we promptly admitted them.
11. We sought through the Engineering Process Group (EPG) and the Management Steering Group (MSG), to improve our direct contact with our Lead Appraiser and the SEI, asking only for their knowledge and expertise to guide us on our process improvement journey.
12. We have recognized the benefits of process improvement as the result of these twelve steps; we have tried to carry this message to other internal groups and external organizations and to practice these principles in all our affairs.
2. We came to believe that a model greater than ourselves (the CMMI) could restore us to sanity.
3. We made a decision to turn our processes and procedures over to the care of Software Engineering Institute.
4. We conducted a searching and fearless gap analysis of our organization.
5. We admitted to our Lead Appraiser, to ourselves, and to our executive management the exact nature of our process weaknesses and gaps.
6. We were entirely ready to have our Lead Appraiser help us address these weaknesses and gaps.
7. We humbly asked our Lead Appraiser to help us remove our weaknesses.
8. We made a list of all projects that had suffered because of our bad practices, and became willing to take corrective actions to address the issues, as applicable.
9. We made direct modifications to our processes wherever possible, except when to do so would jeopardize the success a project.
10. We continued to appraise the organization, and when we had weaknesses we promptly admitted them.
11. We sought through the Engineering Process Group (EPG) and the Management Steering Group (MSG), to improve our direct contact with our Lead Appraiser and the SEI, asking only for their knowledge and expertise to guide us on our process improvement journey.
12. We have recognized the benefits of process improvement as the result of these twelve steps; we have tried to carry this message to other internal groups and external organizations and to practice these principles in all our affairs.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Process Improvement in Small Organizations
On the final day of the 2008 SEPG Conference in Tampa this year there was a very interesting practitioner discussion by two small companies on their experiences in implementing CMMI Maturity Level 2. Their biggest challenge was funding the effort. Fortunately for them, they had three funding streams to draw on:
1. Internal funding
2. Contract funds
3. Funding from their mentor/protege partner
What was significant for these two companies was their levels of senior management commitment. The President of one of the companies was actively engaged with their efforts. He sat in the same office with the team and reviewed the documentation. He had a very hands-on approach that led to rapid implementation. This type of approach won't always work. Senior management has to have the proper attitude towards process improvement and be very supportive.
Other steps these companies took to rapidly improve were to establish a Management Steering Group (MSG) and Engineering Process Group (EPG) very early on as well as provide detailed training on a Process Area (PA) by PA basis, about every two weeks. They had discovered that the Introduction to CMMI class was a great introduction, as indicated by the course title, but the information did not sink in at first. They needed more in-depth discussions, which then led the teams to become more proficient in their PA roles. They also engaged with their mentor/protege (in other words, their CMMI consultant) early on as well who provided guidance and how to implement the model and avoid known pitfalls.
It was interesting to note that the lessons learned by these two small companies are the same lessons learned by much larger organizations and align with what we CMMI consultants and Lead Appraisers always tell our clients. But these lessons are much harder to "sell" to small companies that are seriously resource constrained.
1. Internal funding
2. Contract funds
3. Funding from their mentor/protege partner
What was significant for these two companies was their levels of senior management commitment. The President of one of the companies was actively engaged with their efforts. He sat in the same office with the team and reviewed the documentation. He had a very hands-on approach that led to rapid implementation. This type of approach won't always work. Senior management has to have the proper attitude towards process improvement and be very supportive.
Other steps these companies took to rapidly improve were to establish a Management Steering Group (MSG) and Engineering Process Group (EPG) very early on as well as provide detailed training on a Process Area (PA) by PA basis, about every two weeks. They had discovered that the Introduction to CMMI class was a great introduction, as indicated by the course title, but the information did not sink in at first. They needed more in-depth discussions, which then led the teams to become more proficient in their PA roles. They also engaged with their mentor/protege (in other words, their CMMI consultant) early on as well who provided guidance and how to implement the model and avoid known pitfalls.
It was interesting to note that the lessons learned by these two small companies are the same lessons learned by much larger organizations and align with what we CMMI consultants and Lead Appraisers always tell our clients. But these lessons are much harder to "sell" to small companies that are seriously resource constrained.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)