What is the difference between the terms KPA and PA?
KPA stands for Key Process Area and applied to the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) that was retired years ago. This term no longer has any meaning.
PA stands for a CMMI Process Area.
KPA and PA are basically the same, but KPA is only relevant for the obsolete CMM and PA is only relevant for the current CMMI.
The CMMI Glossary defines a Process Area as a cluster of related practices in an area that, when implemented collectively, satisfy a set of goals considered important for making improvements in that area. All CMMI Process Areas are common to both the Continuous and Staged Representations.
Showing posts with label Process Areas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Process Areas. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
Generic Practice and PA Relationship
Are all Generic Practices (GPs) required for each and every Process Area (PA) when the organization is being appraised? Or there is a main GP for each PA required?
This question is explained in detail in the Intro to CMMI class. If you haven’t already taken the class, I strongly recommend that you take it. Also, if you read the Generic Goal (GG) section of the CMMI book, you read more detail about the GPs.
The short answer to your question is it depends upon the scope of the appraisal and the representation (Staged or Continuous). For Maturity Level 2 all PAs must meet GG2, for ML 3 GG 3, ML 4 GG3, ML 5 GG3. For Capability Level 1 GG 1, CL 2 GG 2, CL 3 GG 3, CL 4 GG 4, CL 5 GG5. But I strongly urge you to take the class and read the model to gain a complete understanding of the answers.
This question is explained in detail in the Intro to CMMI class. If you haven’t already taken the class, I strongly recommend that you take it. Also, if you read the Generic Goal (GG) section of the CMMI book, you read more detail about the GPs.
The short answer to your question is it depends upon the scope of the appraisal and the representation (Staged or Continuous). For Maturity Level 2 all PAs must meet GG2, for ML 3 GG 3, ML 4 GG3, ML 5 GG3. For Capability Level 1 GG 1, CL 2 GG 2, CL 3 GG 3, CL 4 GG 4, CL 5 GG5. But I strongly urge you to take the class and read the model to gain a complete understanding of the answers.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Does anyone have an example of how everything flows together?
I'm looking for a work flow diagram or something of that nature that shows how all of the Level 2 and Level 3 Process areas and associated work products flow together. I'm talking about some sort of diagram or chart that shows a regular waterfall development lifecycle found in a software environment and where each Process area, and it's work products fit into that scenario.
Since the CMMI is a set of guidelines for process improvement, there is no single way of tying everything together. It is highly dependent on how you have implemented the model in your organization. Have you taken the SEI’s Intro to CMMI 3-day class? If so, then you have seen diagrams that sort of address your request. These diagrams also appear in Chapter 4 of the CMMI book. There is a whole series of these diagrams that illustrate how the Process Areas (PAs) are interconnected and the types of information that flow between the PAs. These figures only show possible interactions between the PAs and are not the only way to do things.
Since the CMMI is a set of guidelines for process improvement, there is no single way of tying everything together. It is highly dependent on how you have implemented the model in your organization. Have you taken the SEI’s Intro to CMMI 3-day class? If so, then you have seen diagrams that sort of address your request. These diagrams also appear in Chapter 4 of the CMMI book. There is a whole series of these diagrams that illustrate how the Process Areas (PAs) are interconnected and the types of information that flow between the PAs. These figures only show possible interactions between the PAs and are not the only way to do things.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)