Total Quality Management

Dilbert Style

I’d rather have it wrong than late. We can fix it later. (an industry senior software manager)

The bottom line is schedule. My promotions and raises are based on meeting schedule first and formost. (a government program manager)

They said, WHAT??

CMM

Capability Maturity Model

Improving the Software Development Process

ALSO

SW-CMM SoftwareSA-CMM Software AcquisitionSE-CMM Systems EngineeringP-CMM PeopleIDP-CMM Integrated Product and Processing Development

CMMI Integration of all of the above

How to assess quality of SW contractors?

In 1984 DoD began CMM as program to help assess quality of government SW contractors and to help SW contractors improve themselvesCompetitively awarded to Carnegie Mellon University where program was named the Software Engineering Institute (SEI)Borrows heavily from Deming's Total Quality Management (TQM) and Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI)

SEI Objectives

Address the significant software engineering problems which prevent timely and cost-effective acquisition, development, enhancement, installation and use

of software-intensive systems

SEI ObjectivesIn contrast to quick fix “silver bullet” methods of the pastCMM involves a focused and sustained processCMM involves an ordered set of incremental, proven improvements built on a logical progression of effective practices.5 Maturity LevelsMeeting these objects will result in savings of Time, Money, Productivity and Improvements in Quality

Attachment 2 (Source:

http://www.teraquest.com)

CMMSW Maturity LevelsEvolution From Lower to Higher Levels

CMMSW Maturity Levels (Detailed)

Level 1 – Initial Focus: Good Personnel Ad-hoc and chaotic. Badly missed deadlines. Team tackles projects in different ways each timeCan have strong successes, but also failures  Some time/cost estimates are accurate, many far offSuccess comes from smart people doing the right thingsHard to recover from good people leavingFrequent crises and "firefighting.” (Many believe this is standard for SW development. CMM says NO.)Most SW development organizations are Level 1.

No stable environment In a crisis- planned procedures abandoned Revert to coding fixes Unpredictable outcomes, little formalization Same requirements could get different

software. Good personnel, but not good organization Only a good manager or team gets the project

completed successfully, but when they leave, the stability of the project leaves with them

Risky and wasteful

Level 1 – Initial

Summary of Level 1

Level 1 – Initial. Anything at all. Ad-hoc and chaotic.

Will have some successes, but will also have failures and badly

missed deadlines. Not necessarily repeatable for a

similar new project

Same requirements give same softwarePolicies for managing projects are createdProcedures for implementation of policies are established Based on similar previous projects Software standards defined Configuration Management implemented

Disciplined and stable process

Level 2 - Repeatable

Summary of Level 2

Level 2 – Repeatable. SW processes are defined,

documented, practiced, and people are trained in them.

BUT…groups across an organization may use different processes

Processes and procedures are documentedWell defined, coherent, integrated software engineering and management processesReadiness criteria, standards, verification mechanisms, completion criteriaSoftware engineering and Management activities are stable and repeatable Training Programs supported Peer Reviews

Level 3 - Defined

Level 3 – Defined Focus: Organizational

Support

Key areas. Level 2, plus… Organization-wide process focus Organization-wide process definition Training program in above Integrated software management (above

applied per project) Software product engineering (coding, etc.) Inter-group coordination Peer reviews

Summary of Level 3

Level 3 – Defined. SW processes are consistent and known

across the whole organization. BUT… no way to measure quality or to

predict results

Quantitative quality goalsProductivity and quality are measured and analyzedPredictable results because the process is measured and operates within measurable limitsPredictable high quality software

Level 4 - Managed

Level 4 – Managed Focus: Product/Process

Quality

Key areas. Level 3, plus… Quantitative process management

(data gathering) Quality management (data-driven

quality improvement)

Summary of Level 4

Level 4 – Managed. SW processes and results are measured

quantitatively, and processes are evaluated with this data.

BUT…there is no method set for improvement.

Level 5 - Optimizing

Entire organization is focused on continuous process improvementOrganization has means to identify weaknesses and strengthsCan proactively prevent occurrence of defectsData on effectiveness of processes used to perform cost benefit analyses of new technologies and propose changes to organization’s software processContinuously improving the process

Level 5 – Optimizing Focus: Continuous Improvement

Key areas. Level 4, plus… Defect prevention Technology change management

(bring in new methods) Process change management

(improve processes)

Summary of Level 5

Level 5 – Optimizing. Continuous process improvement.

Experimenting with new methods and technologies. Change processes when find something that works better.

India has one of the greatest number of Level 5 companies

Observations about CMM

CMM contains a lot of verbiage. Can seem like just a word game, which it might be to some extent.If you get beyond the verbiage however, CMM does describe some important methods for running software projects.

Problems with CMM

It is a goal, not a methodBeing used just as stamp of approvalDoesn’t say anything about software!Doesn’t help in a crisisOnly for repetitive tasks

More Drawbacks to CMM

Says what you need to do, but not how to do itFocuses on process, not on good peopleFavors sameness and does not foster innovation

Case Study Results

Level 2 organizations had 30% productivity increase over Level 1 22% increase in early defect detection 40% decrease in post release errors

Raytheon had a 200% productivity increase Saved $4.4Million Over 4 years saved $15Million in rework costs

Motorola reduced errors by 50% at each level of the CMM process

India

Implementing PCMM (Personnel Capability Maturity Model. Human resources were not being

utilized effectively Too much turnover Training and advancement to long

Average of 8 years from programmer to Project Manager

Wants to reduce this to 4 years

What does it take

Money in all resource types at all levels of the organizationHard WorkDedication to a continuous and long=term commitment by everyoneBecomes a lifestyle when implemented correctly

Who made the levels

1993Level 1 85% Level 2 7%Level 3 3%Level 4 Hewllet Packard

Level 5 0

1999Level 1 62%Level 2 23%Level 3 13%Level 4 2%Level 5 5 Boeing, IBM, Lockheed Martin, Motorola, Ogden AFB Logistics Center

Level 5 in 2009