Products
and Services > CMM
and CMMI >
Model Based Improvement Cycle > Assessment
|
Articles:
|
Product
Descriptions:
|
White
Papers:
|
SCAMPI
Assessments
In
model based improvement, assessments are meant to serve as catalysts for
organizational change. The SCAMPI assessment method is used in conjunction with
the CMMI model.
SEI
trains and authorizes lead assessors for SCAMPI.
If an SEI authorized lead assessor conducts a SCAMPI level A assessment, the results can be submitted to the SEI and published. A SCAMPI A assessment result can be a valuable tool for getting
new business, particularly in the
case with government contracts.
If
no marketing advantage accrues from a formal assessment, its if frequently
possible to get most of the same benefits by reducing the number of people
interviewed and relaxing some of the requirements for multiple instances of
evidence that a practice is in use. This
can reduce costs considerably since the major cost in any assessments is the
time of the interviewees.
PS&J
is an authorized SEI Partner for SCAMPI and can provide formal and informal
CMMI assessments.
We can help you select the type that is best for you.
Unless
there is a business case for an immediate formal assessment, PS&J recommends
kicking off the improvement process with an informal assessment. An informal assessment doesn’t require as much effort
on the part of the internal staff and as a result costs considerably less than a
full-blown assessment. Our informal
assessments are basically scaled down formal assessments that involved interviewing a
smaller fraction of the software development population and require a little
less independent corroboration of existing practices.
A
formal assessment like a SCAMPI makes more sense after completing the
initial process improvement cycle since is documents progress in a way that can
easily be used to benchmark against other organizations and is widely accepted
in the community.
Formal
and informal assessments are designed to engage the organization and demonstrate
management’s commitment to improvement. Making this aspect of the assessment a
success requires sponsoring management to:
-
Announce
a commitment to continuous improvement prior to performing the assessment
-
Attend
the kickoff and out-brief meetings
-
Commit
to take action in response to the findings at the out brief meeting.
It
is key for management to create a climate where the staff feels free to talk
about problems. All assessment
vehicles have strict rules about non-attribution and data confidentiality. Interview groups need to be kept large enough so that it is
impossible to infer the specific person that made a particular observation.
To
get full value out of an assessment, it is more important for the staff to see
management begin to take action to deal with the most pressing problems soon
after the assessment. Failure to do
this generates cynicism and actually makes the organization less likely to
improve.
The
assessment findings are one of the primary inputs to the improvement planning
process. The finding from all
PS&J assessments include the following information:
-
a
list of organization strengths and opportunities for improvement
-
an
assessment of the organization’s current CMMI level
-
an
assessment of the organization’s cultural tolerance for process
improvement
-
a
process capability model that defines the current economics of software
development at the organization.
The
process capability model includes estimates of productivity, product quality,
and cost of quality and captures the relationships between these quantities in
quantitative form. The cultural
assessment and the process capability model are proprietary to PS&J and are
not included as part of the standard outputs of the SEI assessment methods.
The
cultural assessment and the process capability model are key to effective
process improvement planning. When the organization creates a post-assessment
action plan to implement improvements, the process capability model provides the
basis for projecting savings, deciding which improvements should be funded, and
estimating the potential return on the improvements. This step is absolutely
necessary. Without quantitative
targets that our related to business goal, there is a significant risk that the
improvement effort will not produce the desired outcome. The cultural assessment
is used to identify cultural barriers to improvement that have to be addressed
as part of a comprehensive improvement plan.
After
the assessment out brief, PS&J works with the management team to set SMART
(Specific, Measurable, Aggressive & Achievable, Relevant to Business,
Time-Bound) improvement goals. The
goals typically cover a one-year period. These goals are another key input to
the improvement planning process.
We
typically recommend using independent lead assessors. If the lead assessor is a
member of the organization being assessed, there are invariably subtle pressures
that tend to bias the results to be more favorable that they actually are. The
result is typically an illusion of progress, where maturity levels rise over
time but productivity stagnates. The
same is true for the developing the improvement plan.
External facilitators can be more objective and serve as honest brokers
between all the relevant parties in a way that is just not possible for internal
people.
| 
