0% found this document useful (0 votes)

255 views189 pages

CMMI-Dev V1.3 Training

CMMI-Dev 1.3 Upgrade Training Official Slides

Uploaded by

raza_arshad_1

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

255 views189 pages

CMMI-Dev V1.3 Training

CMMI-Dev 1.3 Upgrade Training Official Slides

Uploaded by

raza_arshad_1

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 189

CMMI Version 1.

3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213

SCAMPI and SCAMPI Lead Appraiser are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

CMMI and Carnegie Mellon are registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office by Carnegie Mellon University. For more information on CMU/SEI Trademark use, please visit http://www.sei.cmu.edu/legal/marks/index.cfm
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University This material is distributed by the SEI only to course attendees for their own individual study. Except for the U.S. government purposes described below, this material SHALL NOT be reproduced or used in any other manner without requesting formal permission from the Software Engineering Institute at [email protected]. This material was created in the performance of Federal Government Contract Number FA8721-05C-0003 with Carnegie Mellon University for the operation of the Software Engineering Institute, a federally funded research and development center. The U.S. Government's rights to use, modify, reproduce, release, perform, display, or disclose this material are restricted by the Rights in Technical Data-Noncommercial Items clauses (DFAR 252-227.7013 and DFAR 252-227.7013 Alternate I) contained in the above identified contract. Any reproduction of this material or portions thereof marked with this legend must also reproduce the disclaimers contained on this slide. Although the rights granted by contract do not require course attendance to use this material for U.S. Government purposes, the SEI recommends attendance to ensure proper understanding. THE MATERIAL IS PROVIDED ON AN AS IS BASIS, AND CARNEGIE MELLON DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, IMPLIED OR OTHERWISE (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, RESULTS OBTAINED FROM USE OF THE MATERIAL, MERCHANTABILITY, AND/OR NON-INFRINGEMENT).

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Purpose
The purpose of this training is to help you to do the following:
understand the changes and improvements made in CMMI V1.3 successfully make the transition from CMMI V1.2 to CMMI V1.3 of the CMMI Product Suite satisfy a requirement for the following: to participate in a SCAMPISM High Maturity appraisal using CMMI model V1.3 to attend further CMMI V1.3 training courses to become a CMMI-DEV V1.3 or CMMI-ACQ V1.3 instructor to become a V1.3 SCAMPI Lead AppraiserSM or a V1.3 SCAMPI Lead AppraiserSM

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Materials
To successfully complete this on-line training, it would be useful to follow along and see the actual changes in the models. Copies of all three models are available on the SEI website at http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/tools/cmmiv1-3/. Comparison documents are also available at the website that show the redline changes between V1.2 and V1.3. We recommend that you familiarize yourself with the comparison documents and refer to them when you are completing this training. Also many acronyms are used throughout these materials. If you are not familiar with an acronym, please refer to the acronym list in Appendix B in the model documents.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Course Objectives
The objectives of this training course are to enable you to
understand the differences between CMMI V1.2 and V1.3 General changes Process area changes High maturity changes

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Depicting Changes
In these materials, strikethroughs will be used to indicate deletions (strikethrough); red font without strikethroughs to indicate insertions (red font). Editorial changes are seldom depicted.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Modules in this Training

Module 1: Introduction Module 2: General Model Changes Module 3: A Quick Look at V1.3 PA Changes Module 4: Core and Shared PA Changes1 Module 5: CMMI-ACQ Specific PA Changes Module 6: CMMI-DEV Specific PA Changes Module 7: CMMI-SVC Specific PA Changes Module 8: High Maturity PA Changes

The core and shared PAs covered in this module do not include the high maturity core and shared PAs.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

CMMI Revision Process

The CMMI Steering Group provided a long-term strategy and the upgrade criteria for V1.3. The Product Development Team (PDT) reviewed change requests to identify possible changes to the product suite. Configuration Control Boards (CCBs) determined which changes would be accepted. The PDT developed draft versions of the model, training, and appraisal method materials. Model piloting was conducted November 2009 through July 2010; training piloting was conducted August through September 2010; and appraisal piloting was conducted July through December 2010.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Tips for Using These Materials

Obtain a copy of the V1.3 models. Review all material. Follow along in the model as you work through the material to get a full understanding of the changes. Work at your own pace. Take as much time as you need to review the material.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Completion Criteria
Successful completion of CMMI V1.3 Model Upgrade Training requires that you complete the following:
Open and review all modules Complete the confirmation at the end of the course that shows that you have reviewed and understand the material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary
This training provides you with material to help you understand the differences between CMMI V1.2 and CMMI V1.3. If you have any questions about upgrade training, please send email to [email protected]

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213

SCAMPI and SCAMPI Lead Appraiser are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Purpose
The purpose of this module is to describe the general changes to the CMMI models (ACQ, DEV, SVC) for Version 1.3. These changes usually affect more than one place in the model and are often times these changes are discussed further in later modules of this training.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Topics
CMMI Framework Terminology Updating Model Architecture Harmonizing V1.2 Models Glossary Teaming Concepts The Term Project Process Related Experiences Addressing Agile Causal Analysis at Lower Levels of Maturity Customer Satisfaction Modernizing Development Practices Prioritized Customer Requirements

Organization Level Contracts Providing Appropriate Phrasing in Easing Translation Practice Statements Front Matter Generic Practices Lifecycle Needs and Standards

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

CMMI Framework Terminology

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

CMMI Framework Related Terminology1

The Problem
CMMI terminology evolved and wasnt always consistent with the release of new constellations.

Overview of Solution
With the expansion of CMMI to address Acquisition and Services in V1.2, the terminology used to describe CMMI models was formalized and improved. Updates to the glossary include the following:

CMMI Framework The basic structure that organizes CMMI components, including common elements of the current CMMI models as well as rules and methods for generating models, appraisal methods (including associated artifacts), and training materials. (See also CMMI model and CMMI Product Suite.) The framework enables new disciplines areas of interest to be added to CMMI so that the new disciplines they will integrate with the existing ones. [from Glossary]

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

CMMI Framework Related Terminology2

constellation A collection of CMMI components that are used to construct models, training materials, and appraisal related documents for an area of interest (e.g., acquisition, development, services). [from Glossary] In the Front Matter, but not in the Glossary, you will find three terms that are new to DEV V1.2: CMMI Model Foundation or CMF (first introduced in ACQ V1.2) . . . model components common to all CMMI models and constellations. [from
Preface]

To allow the use of multiple models within the CMMI Framework, model components are classified as either common to all CMMI models or applicable to a specific model. The common material is called the CMMI Model Foundation or CMF. Those components are combined with material applicable to an area of interest (e.g., acquisition, development, services) to produce a model. [from
section 1 Introduction]

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

CMMI Framework Related Terminology3

Core PAs A core process area is a process area that is common to all CMMI models.
[from section 1 Introduction]

All CMMI models contain 16 core process areas. These process areas cover basic concepts that are fundamental to process improvement in any area of interest (i.e., acquisition, development, services). Some of the material in the core process areas is the same in all constellations. Other material may be adjusted to address a specific area of interest. Consequently, the material in the core process areas may not be exactly the same.. [from section 2 Process Area
Components]

Shared PAs (There is only one shared PA [SAM].) A shared PA is shared by at least two CMMI models, but not all of them. [from
section 1 Introduction]

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Updating Model Architecture

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Updating Model Architecture1

The Overall Problem Model components of the CMMI architecture are identified and described in Chapter 2, Process Area Components, and Chapter 3, Tying It All Together. Some model components have not fulfilled the purpose for which they were intended.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Updating Model Architecture2

Problems with Model Component Descriptions
Some model component descriptions in V1.2 were inconsistent with the glossary and with their assignment as required, expected, or informative.

Overview of Solution
Revised the model component descriptions (If defined in the glossary, the redundant text in the description was minimized, inconsistent text was eliminated, and a reference to the glossary was added.) Removed any text that made the component inconsistent with its assignment as a required, expected, or informative model component

Example
Generic Practice Elaborations A gGeneric practice elaborations appear after a generic practice in a process area practices to provide guidance on how the generic practices should can be applied uniquely to the process area areas. A generic practice elaboration is an informative model component. (See the definition of generic practice elaboration in the glossary.) ... [from section 2 Process Area Components]
For another example, see next slide.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Updating Model Architecture3

Problems with Typical Work Products
Though an informative model component, typical work products sometimes have been given too much importance (e.g., used as a checklist in appraisals).

Overview of Solution
Renamed typical work product to example work product Reviewed typical work product lists to ensure that individually they are recognizable and collectively they are sufficiently broad in scope In ACQ, renamed typical supplier deliverable to example supplier deliverable Revised the glossary definition to eliminate the following sentence: These examples are called typical work products because there are often other work products that are just as effective but are not listed.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Updating Model Architecture4

Problems with Representations
In the front matter, the staged representation was described as proven while the continuous was not. The CMMI front matter implies there are advantages or benefits inherent in using the staged representation and maturity levels that are not likewise attributed to the continuous representation and capability profiles, including predicting performance, comparing organizations, and improving processes.

Overview of Solution
Introduced continuous and staged representation concepts agnostically with more balance in the front matter Reduced the amount of model material that discusses the representations and their differences, thereby deemphasizing the importance of representations in the model

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Updating Model Architecture5

Problems with Amplifications
In DEV there were about 20 amplifications for SE, SW, and HW. (There were none in ACQ or SVC.) As a concept, amplifications was never well developed in CMMI and users found it confusing.

Overview of Solution
Removed the amplification model component Converted amplifications having value into examples or notes

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Updating Model Architecture6

Problems with References
References often were not helpful. It was confusing when a reference said, Refer to the <destination PA> for more information about xyz, when xyz was not found in the PA the reference pointed to.

Overview of Solution
Revised references so that users can easily find the information that the reference points to by searching for a goal or practice title or purpose statement in the destination PA Introduced a standard sequence to references when there are multiple adjacent references Constellation-unique PAs appear first Within each PA reference grouping, the references are listed alphabetically by the destination PA

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Updating Model Architecture7

Problems with PA Categories
PA categories were used inconsistently across the constellations.

Solutions for ACQ

Renamed the Acquisition PA category to be Acquisition Engineering Moved AM and SSAD from the Acquisition PA category to the Project Management PA category

Solution for DEV

Moved REQM from the Engineering PA category to the Project Management PA category

Solution for SVC

Renamed the Project Management PA category to be Project and Work Management

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Harmonizing V1.2 Models

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Harmonizing V1.2 Models

The Problem
As V1.2 models were created and released, they became out of synch with one another. Improvements made in one model were not made in others simply because of differences in release schedules.

Overview of Solution
Analyzed differences among the three models (ACQ, DEV, SVC) to identify opportunities to improve commonality Examples of improvements include the following: GGs, GPs, and GP elaborations consolidated into one location (DEV) Improved measurement, supplier, and agreement terminology (DEV) Improved definitions of terms related to products and services (DEV, ACQ) Increased emphasis on customer satisfaction (all three) Improved examples, example work products, and notes (all three) Many of the changes made to the model are due to harmonization and are covered in the PA Changes modules of the upgrade training.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Glossary

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Glossary1
The Problem
Some definitions of terms in the glossary had the following problems: They were not consistent with how the same terms were described in other parts of the model (e.g., expected CMMI components, functional configuration audit, higher level management, version control). They did not accurately reflect their relationships with other terms in the glossary (e.g., process, process element, subprocess). They were not consistent with ISO standard definitions (e.g. quality, process, subprocess). They were incorrect or misleading (e.g., base measure, development, end user, natural bounds, process performance baseline, process performance model, quantitative objective). It wasnt clear that part of the glossary entry was the definition of the term and part was usage notes.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Glossary2
Overview of Solution
For terms that were inconsistently described, changed the glossary definition, changed the description in another part of the model, or replaced a description with a reference to the glossary Ensured that related terms had consistent definitions where possible Updated glossary definitions for some terms to be more consistent with ISO standard definitions Corrected errors and improved the clarity of some definitions Established three distinct parts for glossary entries that have different formats, which allows their easy identification: 1. The term 2. The definition 3. Usage notes

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Glossary3
Example Definition Inconsistent with Other Model Material Chapter 2
Generic Practice Elaborations A genericGeneric practice elaboration appearselaborations appear after a generic practice in a process areapractices to provide guidance on how the generic practice shouldcan be applied uniquely to the process areaareas. A generic practice elaboration is an informative model component. (See the definition of generic practice elaboration in the glossary.)

Glossary
generic practice elaboration An informative model component that appears after a generic practice to provide guidance on how the generic practice shouldcould be applied uniquely to thea process area. (This model component is not present in all CMMI models.)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Glossary4
Example Three-Part Glossary Entries
Two-part definition from DEV V1.2
product baseline In configuration management, the initial approved technical data package (including, for software, the source code listing) defining a configuration item during the production, operation, maintenance, and logistic support of its lifecycle. (See also configuration item and configuration management.)

Three-part definition from DEV V1.3

product baseline The initial approved technical data package defining a configuration item during the production, operation, maintenance, and logistic support of its lifecycle. (See also configuration item, configuration management, and technical data package.) This term is related to configuration management.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Glossary5
Example Definition Inconsistent with ISO Glossary
quality The degree to which ability of a set of inherent characteristics fufillsof a product, product component, or process to fulfill requirements. of customers.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Glossary6
Example Definition Inconsistent with Intent Glossary
establish and maintain Create, document, use, and revise . . . as necessary to ensure it remains they remain useful.
The phrase establish and maintain means more than a combination of its component terms; . . . plays a special role in communicating a deeper principle in CMMI: work products that have a central or key role in work group, project, and organizational performance should be given attention to ensure they are used and useful in that role. This phrase has particular significance in CMMI because it often appears in goal and practice statements . . . and should be taken as shorthand for applying the principle to whatever work product is the object of the phrase.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Teaming Concepts

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Teaming Concepts1
The Problem
Teams are clearly relevant to product development. How teams are established in an organization has a lot to do with whether or not they are successful. However, there are no specific practices addressing rules for establishing and operating teams in DEV, instead there is the Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) addition, which is optional. Fewer than 5% of recent appraisals have included IPPD. For the acquisition of complex systems, integrated teaming is not an option but a necessity. Thus, ACQ has, instead of an addition for IPPD, expected material that covers integrated teaming derived from generalizing and simplifying the IPPD material from DEV. SVC adopted the ACQ approach, but in many service contexts integrated teams were not the key differentiator for success and the concept also proved to be problematic in some contexts. Thus to harmonize the models, a different approach was needed.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Teaming Concepts2
Overview of Solution
Replaced the concepts of integrated teaming and IPPD with a more general concept of teaming, thereby eliminating the IPPD addition and making the approach to teaming consistent in all three models (By making the three constellations common, teaming can be part of the CMF.) Replaced the glossary definition of integrated team with a definition of team In the glossary definition, placed emphasis on what enables superior team performance: A team establishes and maintains a process that identifies roles, responsibilities, and interfaces; is sufficiently precise to enable the team to measure, manage, and improve their work performance; and enables the team to make and defend their commitments.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Teaming Concepts3
Example
IPPD Addition Integrated processes that emphasize parallel rather than serial development are a cornerstone of IPPD implementation. The processes for developing the product and for developing product-related lifecycle processes, such as the manufacturing process . . .

ACQ IPM SP 1.6 Establish Teams Establish and maintain integrated teams.

SVC IWM SP 1.6 Establish Teams Establish and maintain integrated teams.

DEV IPM SP 1.6 Establish Teams Establish and maintain teams.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

The Term Project

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

The Term Project1

The Problem
In V1.2 models, the word project was used in all three CMMI models, especially in the core process areas. Project was almost implicitly understood by product developers and acquirers. However, service providers found it difficult to interpret goals and practices containing the word, often misinterpreted the models practices, and sometimes believed that model content containing the word project did not apply to them. Although some users (probably familiar with development environments) could adjust, others had great difficulty and asked many questions.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

The Term Project2

Overview of Solution
Kept the word project in the DEV and ACQ models, but replaced it with alternate terms in the SVC model (Depending on its implied meaning, the word project was generally either (1) simply removed, (2) replaced with the word work, or (3) replaced with the phrase work group.) Changed process area names in SVC (e.g., Project Planning becomes Work Planning) (The process area category Project Management also became Project and Work Management.) Considered material to be CMF since the only difference from the other models is the replacement of the word project Added terms and revised definitions in the glossary that use the word project to ensure that the glossary more broadly fit all CMMI models

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

The Term Project3

Example Glossary Definitions Revised glossary definition
process asset library A collection of process asset holdings that can be used by an organization or, project., or work group. (See also organizations process asset library.)

Added glossary definition

work plan A plan of activities and related resource allocations for a work group. Work planning includes estimating the attributes of work products and tasks, determining the resources needed, negotiating commitments, producing a schedule, and identifying and analyzing risks. Iterating through these activities can be necessary to establish the work plan.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

The Term Project4

Example Process Area Content
Project Planning (ACQ & DEV) Purpose: The purpose of Project Planning (PP) is to establish and maintain plans that define project activities. SG 2 Develop a Project Plan A project plan is established and maintained as the basis for managing the project. Work Planning (SVC) Purpose: The purpose of Work Planning (WP) is to establish and maintain plans that define work activities. SG 2 Develop a Work Plan A work plan is established and maintained as the basis for managing the work.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Process Related Experiences

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Process Related Experiences

The Problem
In multiple places of the V1.2 models, including the definition of defined process, GP 3.2, IPM SP 1.7, and OPF SP 3.4, a compound phrase is used that itemizes types of process related experiences. These phrases are often inconsistent with each other, creating confusion and problems in appraisals.

Overview of Solution
Replaced these compound expressions, itemizing types of process related experiences with the simpler phrase process related experiences (OPF) SP 3.4 Incorporate Experiences into Organizational Process Assets Incorporate process related work products, measures, and improvement information experiences derived from planning and performing the process into organizational process assets. . . . Examples of process related experiences include work products, measures, measurement results, lessons learned, and process improvement suggestions. . . . [from GP 3.2 informative material]

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Providing Appropriate Phrasing in Practice Statements

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Providing Appropriate Phrasing in Practice Statements1

The Problem
Certain words and phrases that appear in goal and practice statements unnecessarily complicate their interpretation. Words and phrases that were considered problematic include: Appropriate Best Designated Effectively Essential Most important Necessary Realistic Reasonable Relevant

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Providing Appropriate Phrasing in Practice Statements2

Overview of Solution
Reworded some goals and practices to no longer use unnecessary words or phrases

Examples
(PPQA) SP 1.1 Objectively Evaluate Processes Objectively evaluate designated selected performed processes against applicable process descriptions, standards, and procedures. Package and Deliver the Product or Product Component Package the assembled product or product component and deliver it to the appropriate customer. Analyze Individual Incident Data Analyze individual incident data to determine the best a course of action.
(Also see GP 2.6 statement in GP section of this presentation.)

(PI) SP 3.4

(IRP) SP 2.2

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Generic Practices

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Generic Practices1
The Problem
There are inconsistencies among GP descriptions, glossary definitions, associated PAs, and GP elaborations. There is wording in some GP descriptions (notably GP 2.8 and GP 3.2) that confuse users about the intent of the GP and lead to incorrect interpretation (e.g., a measure for every PA).

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Generic Practices2
Solutions
Revised GG 1 so that it is in the correct voice (i.e., passive voice) GG 1 Achieve Specific Goals The process supports and enables achievement of the specific goals of the process area byare supported by the process by transforming identifiable input work products to produceinto identifiable output work products. [Note: process of may be replaced by process by] Revised the GP 2.6 title to align with the statement and intent of the GP
GP 2.6 Manage ConfigurationsControl Work Products Place designatedselected work products of the process under appropriate levels of control.

Updated the GP 2.7 description to include examples of relevant stakeholders

Examples of stakeholders that might serve as relevant stakeholders for specific tasks, depending on context, include individuals, teams, management, customers, suppliers, end users, operations and support staff, other projects, and government regulators. [already in ACQ; added to DEV and SVC]
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Generic Practices3
Clarified the GP 2.8 informative material (These clarifications are intended to 1) counter the impression that a measurement is required for every PA and 2) differentiate GP 2.8 and GP 2.10 relative to: a) the frequency of monitoring and controlling and b) the level of management involved.) Subpractices 1. Measure Evaluate actual progress and performance against the plan for performing the process. The measures evaluations are of the process, its work products, and its services. 3. Review activities, status, and results of the process with the immediate level of management responsible for the process and identify issues. TheThese reviews are intended to provide the immediate level of management with appropriate visibility into the process. The reviews can be both periodic and event driven based on the day-to-day monitoring and controlling of the process, and are supplemented by periodic and eventdriven reviews with higher level management as described in GP 2.10.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Generic Practices4
Expanded the scope of GP 2.9 to align with the expectations set in PPQA GP 2.9 Objectively Evaluate Adherence Objectively evaluate adherence of the process and selected work products against itsthe process description, standards, and procedures, and address noncompliance. The purpose of this generic practice is to provide credible assurance that the process isand selected work products are implemented as planned and adheres adhere to its the process description, standards, and procedures. This generic practice is implemented, in part, by evaluating selected work products of the process.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Generic Practices5
Revised the GP 2.10, Review Status with Higher Level Management, informative material to clarify that higher level management can include, but is not required to include senior management . . . In particular, higher level management includes can include senior management. Streamlined GP 3.2 and its elaborations with process related experiences
GP 3.2 Collect Improvement Information Process Related Experiences Collect work products, measures, measurement results, and improvement information process related experiences derived from planning and performing the process to support the future use and improvement of the organizations processes and process assets.

Updated GP elaborations to 1) reflect changes in the content of the PA they are associated with and 2) remove references to the GP-PA relationships table that is now in the same section

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Generic Practices6
Examples
Examples of updates to GP elaborations that reflect PA changes (DEV GP 2.3) QPM Elaboration Special expertise in statistics . . . may be needed to define the analytic techniques for statistical used in quantitative management . . . however, teams need sufficient expertise to support a basic understanding of their process performance as they perform their daily work. Examples of other resources provided include the following: . . . Scripts and tools that assist teams in analyzing their own process performance with minimal need for additional expert assistance (DEV GP 2.4) TS Elaboration Appointing a lead or chief architect that oversees the technical solution and has authority over design decisions helps to maintain consistency in product design and evolution. Deleted capability levels 4 and 5, generic goals 4 and 5, and all level 4 and 5 generic practices as part of high maturity changes
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Lifecycle Needs and Standards

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Lifecycle Needs and Standards

The Problem
V1.2 models focus on the development lifecycle, but do not mention other lifecycles relevant to CMMI, including manufacturing, deployment, operations, maintenance, support, and disposal.

Overview of Solution
Added examples from DEV Part 1 to the SVC model for lifecycles such as manufacturing and maintenance In OPF SP 1.1, added an example box that provides examples of standards that could be used to reflect the organizations process needs and objectives, including lifecycle related standards Added standards as entries to the References in the Appendix (e.g., ISO/IEC 15288:2008, ISO/IEC 27001:2005, NDIA Engineering for System Assurance Guidebook)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Addressing Agile

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Addressing Agile1
The Problem
Developers that use Agile methods sometimes resist using CMMI because they cant see how CMMI practices are applicable to and can improve the effectiveness of organizations using Agile methods.

Overview of Solution
Added guidance to appropriate PAs to do the following: Help users interpret the practices in a context where Agile methods are used Reinforce the applicability of the practices in an Agile environment Send the message that CMMI is a robust best practice framework meant to be used in Agile environments as well as other development environments

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Addressing Agile2
Added a new section to DEV Chapter 5 entitled Interpreting CMMI When Using Agile Approaches This section describes how CMMI practices can apply in a variety of development environments. It also provides interpretive guidance in selected PAs that explains how the PA can be used in Agile environments. A reference to this new section appears in the SSD intro notes of SVC. Added interpretive guidance to the following PAs: In DEV: CM, REQM, PP, RD, TS, PI, VER, PPQA, and RSKM In ACQ: AM, ATM, PMC, and PP In SVC: SSD Added in DEV and SVC (SSD only) Agile-related examples (as bullets)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Addressing Agile3
Example
An example of a note added to DEV is the following one for PP: In Agile environments . . . Teams plan, monitor, and adjust plans during each iteration as often as it takes (e.g., daily). Commitments to plans are demonstrated when tasks are assigned and accepted during iteration planning, user stories are elaborated or estimated, and iterations are populated with tasks from a maintained backlog of work. (See Interpreting CMMI When Using Agile Approaches in Part I.)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Causal Analysis at Lower Levels of Maturity

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Causal Analysis at Lower Levels of Maturity1

The Problem
The CAR PA was placed at maturity level 5 to support high maturity practices with more sophisticated approaches to understanding selected outcomes, their causes, and possible resolutions by using statistical and other quantitative techniques. However, organizations have found a need to perform causal analysis at lower levels of maturity.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Causal Analysis at Lower Levels of Maturity2

Overview of Solution
Revised the introductory notes of higher level PAs to acknowledge the value of their SPs in contexts that do not meet the assumptions for high maturity use and provided cautions and limitations for use in other contexts Added model content that encourages appropriate use of causal analysis at lower maturity levels Added a subpractice in IPM SP 1.5, Manage the Project Using Integrated Plans 5. Address causes of selected issues that can affect project objectives. Added an SP in QPM SP 2.3 Perform Root Cause Analysis Added a reference to IPM SP 1.5 in IRP

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Customer Satisfaction

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Customer Satisfaction
The Problem
Especially in DEV, customer satisfaction was rarely mentioned in V1.2. All three models have this issue to some degree.

Overview of Solution
Added informative material, such as customer satisfaction related measures and examples, to the following PAs: In ACQ: ARD and OPF In DEV: MA, OPF, PMC, and RD In SVC: MA

Examples from DEV

. . . Candidate improvements to the organizations processes and process assets are obtained from various sources, including . . . results of customer satisfaction evaluations, . . . [OPF intro notes] Examples of process performance objectives include the following: . . . Achieve a customer satisfaction rating of a certain value [OPF SP 1.1]
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Modernizing Development Practices

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Modernizing Development Practices1

The Problem
Much of the engineering content of DEV V1.2 is ten years old. DEV was a starting point for the other two constellations. Therefore, no V1.2 model adequately addresses modern engineering approaches, which are now in more widespread use. For example, RD SG 3 and RD SP 3.2 both emphasize functionality and not nonfunctional requirements (SSD SP 1.3 also does too). Also, Engineering and other PAs rarely mention the following concepts: Quality attributes (i.e., non functional requirements or ilities) Allocation of product capabilities to release increments Product lines System of systems Architecture-centric development practices Technology maturation

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Modernizing Development Practices2

Overview of Solution
Updated the glossary to include new terms (and modified some old terms), including quality attribute, architecture, and definition of required functionality and quality attributes Updated the informative material in all three models (especially RD, REQM, VAL, VER) to bring more balance to functional and quality attribute requirements (non-functional requirements) Made minimal updates to required and expected content (RD SG 3, RD SP 3.2, and SSD) Updated the informative material in all three models to address other modern engineering approaches (e.g., product lines) Replaced selected uses of the overloaded term performance in all three models with another appropriate qualifying phrase

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Modernizing Development Practices3

Example
Example of a new term that reflects modern engineering, which was added to the glossary in V1.3 models quality attribute A property of a product or service by which its quality will be judged by relevant stakeholders. Quality attributes are characterizable by some appropriate measure.
Quality attributes are non-functional, such as timeliness, throughput, responsiveness, security, modifiability, reliability, and usability. They have a significant influence on the architecture.

architecture The set of structures needed to reason about a product. These structures are comprised of elements, relations among them, and properties of both.
In a service context, the architecture is often applied to the service system. Note that functionality is only one aspect of the product. Quality attributes, such as responsiveness, reliability, and security, are also important to reason about. Structures provide the means for highlighting different portions of the architecture. (See also functional architecture.)
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Modernizing Development Practices4

Examples of minimal updates to required and expected material and updates to informative material (RD) SG 3 Analyze and Validate Requirements The requirements are analyzed and validated, and a definition of required functionality is developed. . . . A scenario is typically a sequence of events that mightmay occur in the development, use, or sustainment of the product, which is used to make explicit some of the functional or quality attribute needs of the stakeholders. [From first note under SP 3.1 statement] SP 3.2 Establish a Definition of Required Functionality and Quality Attributes Subpractices 1. Determine key mission and business drivers.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Prioritized Customer Requirements

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Prioritized Customer Requirements

The Problem
Especially in DEV, customer priorities were rarely mentioned in V1.2.

Overview of Solution
Made the prioritization of requirements more explicit in RD SP 1.2 and SSD SP 1.1. This change will also result in RD, SSD, and ARD being more in synch (harmonized) SP 1.2 Develop the Transform Stakeholder Needs into Customer Requirements Transform stakeholder needs, expectations, constraints, and interfaces into prioritized customer requirements. Added informative material to the following PAs: In ACQ: PP In DEV: OPD, PP, RD In SVC: PP, SSD

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Organization Level Contracts

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Organization Level Contracts

The Problem
CMMI V1.2 did not cover organization-level contracts (e.g., using preferred suppliers, task orders).

Overview of Solution
Added minimal informative material to the following: SSAD SP 1.1 Identify Potential Suppliers (ACQ only) OPD SP 1.1 Establish Standard Processes (all 3 models) SAM SP 1.1 Determine Acquisition Type (DEV and SVC only)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Easing Translation

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Easing Translation1
The Problem
The models are translated into multiple languages because CMMI has a worldwide user base. However, most of the developers who create and update the models are not familiar with issues encountered in translation and may use idioms (e.g., one size doesnt fit all). Further, because of the large number of developers, the work of multiple authors often means inconsistent use of phrasing (e.g., organizational process assets vs. organizations process assets) and even some terminology.

Overview of Solution
Reviewed the V1.3 model drafts to identify terminology and phrasing issues that can create translation problems (The CMMI Translation Team, consisting of members from different countries and representing different languages conducted the review. Many of the problems were consistency problems [e.g., percent vs. percentage] or overloaded terms [e.g., performance].)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Easing Translation2
CMMI V1.2 foreign language translation status Language Japanese French German Spanish Portuguese Language Status (for DEV V1.2) Completed August 2007. Intro course translated October 2007 Completed August 2008 Completed April 2009. Intro course translated October 2009 Completed in June 2009 Completed in May 2010 Status (for ACQ V1.2)

Chinese (trad.) Completed December 2007

Chinese (trad.) Completed April 2009 Language Arabic Status (for SVC V1.2) To start, pending agreement
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

Chinese (trad.) Completed in July 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Front Matter

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Front Matter
The Problem
Many improvements were made to the models and the front matter needed to describe and reflect those changes. Overview of Solution Added the history of CMMI to accompany Figure 1.2 With a few exceptions, removed mention of source models Removed any biases favoring maturity levels or capability levels Clarified that CMMI models are not processes or process descriptions Added information on selecting the right CMMI model for use Clarified that section 2 Process Area Components contains descriptions and not definitions Mentioned (DEV only) that recursion among PAs can also apply to Project Management PAs (In V1.2, some inferred the idea of recursion might apply to Engineering PAs only.)
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary
There were many changes to the model in many areas. The following V1.3 change criteria was used to guide these changes:
Improve clarity of high maturity material and its alignment across required, expected, informative Provide more effective GPs Improve appraisal efficiency Increase the commonality across the constellations: harmonize the constellations, including incorporation of improvements introduced in later V1.2 releases Reduce model complexity and size Correct identified model defects or provide enhancements

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213

SCAMPI and SCAMPI Lead Appraiser are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Purpose
Improvements were made to all PAs; some PAs changed more than others. This module provides a summary of changes for each PA. The summaries of changes are presented in alphabetical order by PA abbreviation.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in AM
Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Adjusted the focus of an example work product to help ensure that the specific practice (SP 1.1 Execute the Supplier Agreement) is interpreted to cover responsibilities of the acquirer as well as the supplier Added guidance for determining the levels to which the selected supplier processes should be monitored Moved this process area from the Acquisition process area category to the Project Management category

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in ARD

Made no substantive changes to specific goals or specific practices Added material throughout the process area to incorporate modern engineering practices, such as quality attributes, product lines, system of systems, architecture-centric practices, allocation of product capabilities to release increments, and technology maturation (This addition of material resulted in changes to informative material and terminology.) Added informative material to acknowledge the importance of customer satisfaction Added informative material to highlight transition, sustainment, operations, and installation as lifecycle stages to be considered during requirements development Added and revised glossary terminology: quality attributes, architecture, allocated requirement, product line

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in ATM

Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Added material throughout the process area to incorporate modern engineering practices, such as quality attributes, product lines, system of systems, architecture-centric practices, allocation of product capabilities to release increments, and technology maturation (This addition of material resulted in changes to informative material.) Added informative material to provide guidance for managing suppliers that are using an Agile method Added examples and guidance to informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in AVAL

Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Clarified when validation occurs in the product lifecycle Provided example validation methods for incremental development

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in AVER

Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Added architecture evaluations as an additional method of verification

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in CAM

Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Provided guidance relating CAM to quality attributes

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in CAR

Used outcomes to include positive outcomes instead of only defects and problems Added examples for service organizations and for selecting outcomes for analysis Added subpractices in SP 1.1 for defining the problem, and in SP 2.2 for following up when expected results were not realized Added more information about how PPMs can be used Added informative material addressing more proactive defect prevention

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in CM
Made no substantive changes to specific goals or specific practices Removed functional configuration audits (FCA) and physical configuration audits (PCA) from the glossary (which are used only in SP 3.2 Perform Configuration Audits) Added guidance at multiple locations on how CM applies to hardware, equipment, and other tangible assets in addition to software and documentation Addressed how CM applies in Agile environments in the introductory notes Added subpractices about specifying relationships among configuration items, providing access control to the CM system, and categorizing and prioritizing change requests Added the need to check for consistency among configuration items as part of assuring baseline integrity
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in DAR

Made no substantive changes to the specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Made minor changes to the informative material to provide clarification of practices and subpractices Added guidance on defining the issue to be addressed (the decision to be made) and on communicating the results and rationale for the solution

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in IPM

Deleted SG 3 and its associated specific practices to remove the IPPD addition Added SP 1.5 subpractice 5 to remind the user that causal analysis to prevent recurrence of issues can be one of the actions taken to improve project or work performance Added SP 1.6 to address teams from a broader perspective than IPPD Revised the following terms in the glossary: project, project startup, and team Deleted program from the glossary

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in IRP

Restructured IRP SG 2 and SG 3 to more clearly distinguish between the scope of each goal (SG 2 will now Identify, Control, and Address Individual Incidents, and SG3 will Analyze and Address Causes and Impacts of Selected Incidents.) Added the concept of identifying a previously established workaround or known reusable solution to handle an incident similar to past incidents in SG 2 and SG 3 Clarified the SP 3.1 title and practice statement to reflect that for selected incidents, underlying causes are analyzed Added examples and guidance to informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in MA
Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Distinguished more clearly between information needs and objectives, measurement objectives, and business/project objectives in the informative material Added informative material to acknowledge the importance of customer satisfaction Added a table similar to the one for CMMI-ACQ, which provides some common examples of measures, measurement information categories, base measures, derived measures, and measurement relationships

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in OPD

Removed all IPPD addition material including SG 2, Enable IPPD Management Added SP 1.7 (formerly SP 2.2), Establish Rules and Guidelines for Teams and modified the purpose statement Replaced the glossary definition of integrated team with one for team Provided additional guidance and examples to the informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in OPF

Made no substantive changes to specific goals or terminology Simplified the SP 3.4 compound practice statement from collecting process-related work products, measures, and improvement information to collecting process related experiences Added guidance on evaluating customer satisfaction as a source for process improvements Added examples and guidance to the informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

100

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in OPM (old OID)

Expanded the former OID PA to include performance management and called it Organizational Performance Management (OPM) to emphasize a focus on performance of the organizational processes as they relate to business objectives Defined a new goal about managing business performance using statistical and other quantitative techniques Clarified that improvements selected for possible implementation can be validated in different ways (Piloting is not the only option.) More explicitly described the use of process performance models Provided more information about how improvements can be selected for deployment Changed references from process and technology improvements to improvements with an explanation that improvements include both

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

101

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in OPP

Restructured OPP, moving Establish Quality and Process Performance Objectives to SP 1.1 for emphasis Revised SP 1.4 to include process performance analysis and assessment of subprocess stability Revised SP 1.5 to clarify that process performance models are used throughout the development lifecycle toward achieving quality and process performance objectives Clarified that not all process performance baselines and models must be created at the organization level (Projects can follow OPP practices to create process performance baselines and models, when appropriate.) Clarified the relationship of OPP to other high maturity process areas Emphasized traceability to business objectives through modifications to SP1.1 and SP1.2

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

102

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in OT
Revised the PA to eliminate technical training where it may not apply to all model constellations Removed the subjective term necessary (as in Provide Necessary Training) from the SG 2 title and statement Made no substantive changes to specific practices or terminology Added examples and guidance to the informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

103

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in PI
Made no substantive changes to specific goals Changed SP 1.1 to focus on an integration strategy rather than an integration sequence to reflect the complexity of the activity (This change caused additional revisions to SP 3.2 and informative material throughout the process area.) Added material to incorporate modern engineering practices, such as quality attributes, product lines, system of systems, architecture-centric practices, allocation of product capabilities to release increments, and technology maturation (This change resulted in further changes to SP 3.1 and informative material throughout the process area.) Added information on how Product Integration works with Agile methodologies Added examples and guidance to the informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

104

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in PMC

Made no substantive changes to specific goals or specific practices Revised the definitions of the following terms in the glossary: project and project startup Deleted the term program from the glossary Provided additional examples and made some minor changes to the informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

105

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in PP
Made no substantive changes to specific goals or specific practices Revised the definitions of the following terms in the glossary: project and project startup Deleted the term program from the glossary Added information on how PP applies to product lines and Agile environments in the introductory notes Removed the material that addressed IPPD Added subpractices to specific practices 2.3 and 2.4 Modified the informative material so that the development of WBS can be based on other considerations in addition to the product or product architecture

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

106

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in PPQA

Made no substantive changes to specific goals or terminology Changed designated to selected in the specific practices to convey that there should be a selection not just a designation of what to objectively evaluate Clarified that PPQA applies to both project and organization level activities and work products Added information about how PPQA applies in Agile environments in the introductory notes Emphasized more consistently in the informative material that objective evaluations are applied to selected performed processes and work products Generalized the subpractices so that they do not limit the value that objective evaluations can provide

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

107

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in QPM

Restructured QPM so that SG1 focuses on preparation and SG2 focuses on managing the project Broadened the focus on using statistical techniques from individual selected subprocesses to cover multiple levels from the individual subprocesses to the entire project Added guidance about using process performance baselines and process performance models Defined quantitative management in the glossary to include statistical techniques and used that definition throughout QPM Modified the practice to remove the emphasis on applying statistical methods to understand variation and to reduce the over-emphasis on control charts Added new practices about managing performance and performing root cause analysis
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

108

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in RD
Revised a specific goal (i.e., SG 3 Analyze and Validate Requirements), a specific practice (i.e., SP 3.2 Establish a Definition of Required Functionality and Quality Attributes), informative material, and terminology by adding material throughout the process area to incorporate modern engineering practices involving quality attributes, product lines, system of systems, architecture-centric practices, allocation of product capabilities to release increments, and technology maturation Modified SP 1.2 Transform Stakeholder Needs into Customer Requirements to emphasize that the result is prioritized customer requirements Added information on how Requirements Development works with Agile methodologies Added and revised the following glossary terminology: quality attributes, architecture, definition of required functionality and quality attributes, allocated requirement, functional analysis, product line
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

109

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in REQM

Made no substantive changes to specific goals or terminology Revised SP 1.5 on ensuring alignment to better describe the intent and making it more proactive by focusing on the alignment of plans and work products with requirements rather than finding inconsistencies Added information to the introductory notes on how REQM applies in Agile environments Made revisions in SP 1.4 to more clearly communicate what is intended by traceability Changed agreed-on requirements to approved requirements throughout the PA to more clearly communicate what will be the basis for planning, acquisition, design, service delivery, etc. Moved this process area from the Engineering process area category to the Project Management category

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

110

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in RSKM

Made no substantive changes to specific goals or terminology Modified the specific practice 3.1 statement to explicitly tie risk mitigation planning back to the risk management strategy Addressed how RSKM applies in Agile environments in the introductory notes Provided additional examples and made some minor changes to the informative material Added the following themes to the informative material:
the use of industry standards to help identify and prevent risks risks associated with quality attributes and product architecture the use of risk monetization to enhance standard treatment of risks the use of techniques such as FMEA to improve the discipline in treatment of risk parameters

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

111

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SAM

Made no substantive changes to specific goals Revised the wording in SP1.3, Establish Supplier Agreements, from formal agreements to supplier agreements Demoted SP 2.2, Monitor Selected Supplier Processes, and SP 2.3, Evaluate Selected Supplier Work Products, to subpractices of SP 2.1, Execute the Supplier Agreement Revised the practice SP2.3 (previously numbered as SP 2.5), Ensure Transition of Products, to allow it to apply when the product or service is delivered directly from the supplier to the customer or end user Added the following terms to the glossary: acquirer, contractual requirements, deliverable, solicitation package, and supplier agreement Clarified the scope of SAM practices applicability Added the concept products and processes of significant value to the project to help determine what to monitor and evaluate
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

112

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SCON

Made no substantive changes to specific goals Revised SP 3.3, Analyze Results of Verification and Validation, to focus on verification and validation of the service continuity plan Explicitly defined the term essential functions

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

113

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SD
Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Provided guidance to maintain traceability to requirements when the resolution to a service request results in changes to the service system Added material that reminds service providers to give customer and end user training and orientation as needed Added guidance on managing and controlling operationally oriented quality attributes associated with service delivery

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

114

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SSAD

Made no substantive changes to specific goals or terminology Reworded SP1.3 to reduce subjectivity in the practice statement Added informative material about handling organizational level preferredsupplier types of agreements Added compliance to quality attribute requirements as an example of an area used to evaluate supplier abilities Added notes to reinforce that the evaluation of supplier proposals includes an evaluation of past performance Added guidance that the acquirer should review requirements of the agreement with the supplier and end user to assist in establishing a mutual understanding of the agreement Moved this process area from the Acquisition process area category to the Project Management category

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

115

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SSD

Made no substantive changes to specific goals Added material to incorporate modern engineering practices, such as quality attributes, architecture-centric practices, allocation of service system capabilities to release increments, and technology maturation (This change resulted in further changes to SP 1.3 and to informative material throughout the process area.) Added information on how Service System Development works with Agile methodologies Modified SP 1.1, Develop Stakeholder Requirements, to emphasize that the result is prioritized stakeholder requirements Changed integration sequence to integration strategy throughout the SP 2.5 informative material where appropriate

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

116

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SST

Made no substantive changes to specific goals or terminology Added material to incorporate the consideration of quality attributes into service system transition activities (This change resulted in changes to SP 1.1 and informative material throughout the process area.) Added warranty considerations as part of the transition planning activities

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

117

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in STSM

Made no substantive changes to specific goals or terminology Removed the unnecessary term relevant from the SP 1.1 title, Gather and Analyze Relevant Data Added guidance about planning for, and identifying needs and expectations of, standards services

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

118

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in TS
Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Added material throughout the process area to incorporate modern engineering practices, such as quality attributes, product lines, system of systems, architecture-centric practices, allocation of product capabilities to release increments, and technology maturation Added information on how Technical Solution works with Agile methodologies Added examples and guidance to the informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

119

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in VAL

Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Clarified when validation occurs in the product lifecycle Listed incremental delivery of a working product as an example validation method Addressed the resolution of defects found in validation

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

120

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in VER

Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Added material to incorporate modern engineering practices, such as quality attributes, product lines, system of systems, architecture-centric practices, allocation of product capabilities to release increments, and technology maturation (This change resulted in further changes to informative material throughout the process area.) Added information on how Verification and Validation work with Agile methodologies Added examples and guidance to the informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

121

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary: Specific Goal Changes

The following PAs have SG changes:
IPM IRP OPD OT RD

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

122

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary: Specific Practice Changes

The following PAs have SP changes:
IPM IRP OPD PI PPQA RD REQM RSKM SAM SCON SSAD SSD SST STSM
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

123

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213

SCAMPI and SCAMPI Lead Appraiser are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

125

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Purpose
This module provides a description of the changes for each of the core and shared process areas at maturity levels 2 and 3. All but Supplier Agreement Management are core process areas. SAM is a shared PA that appears in DEV and SVC models.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

126

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Topics
Configuration Management (CM) Decision Analysis and Resolution (DAR) Integrated Project Management (IPM) Measurement and Analysis (MA) Organizational Process Development (OPD) Organizational Process Focus (OPF) Organizational Training (OT) Project Monitoring and Control (PMC) Project Planning (PP) Process and Product Quality Assurance (PPQA) Requirements Management (REQM) Risk Management (RSKM) Supplier Agreement Management (SAM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

127

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Configuration Management (CM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

128

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in CM
Made no substantive changes to specific goals or specific practices Removed functional configuration audits (FCA) and physical configuration audits (PCA) from the glossary (which are used only in SP 3.2 Perform Configuration Audits Added guidance at multiple locations on how CM applies to hardware, equipment, and other tangible assets in addition to software and documentation Addressed how CM applies in Agile environments in the introductory notes Added subpractices about specifying relationships among configuration items, providing access control to the CM system, and categorizing and prioritizing change requests Added the need to check for consistency among configuration items as part of assuring baseline integrity
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

129

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Provided more examples of work products to be placed under CM (e.g., hardware and equipment, tool configurations, test tools and scripts, user stories, architecture documentation, product line plans) Addressed sharing of core assets across product lines Emphasized the need to support frequent change in Agile environments

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

130

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.1 Identify Configuration Items
Expanded the concept of configuration items in the notes to include hardware, equipment, and tangible assets as well as software and documentation In subpractice 1, added user stories or story cards and declared business case, logic, or value as examples of work products that may be part of a configuration item In subpractice 3 added minimum marketable features and the purpose the configuration item serves as examples of characteristics of configuration items Added a new subpractice and note 6. Specify relationships among configuration items. Incorporating the types of relationships (e.g., parent-child, dependency) that exist among configuration items into the configuration management structure (e.g., configuration management database) assists in managing the effects and impacts of changes.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

131

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 1.2 Establish a Configuration Management System
Provided additional guidance in notes acknowledging that a CM system may consist of multiple subsystems with different implementations that are appropriate for each CM environment In subpractice 1, replaced the examples of levels of control with uncontrolled, work-in-progress, and released and provided a description of each level Added a new subpractice 2. Provide access control to ensure authorized access to the configuration management system. In new subpractice 3, removed the example box of alternative CM systems as it was largely redundant with the rest of the practice

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

132

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes4

SP 1.3 Create or Release Baselines
Revised the notes to better describe baseline Added guidance to emphasize that a baseline represents a fixed set of work products at a distinct point in time Added the following note on including hardware products within baselines Hardware products as well as software and documentation should also be included in baselines for infrastructure related configurations (e.g., software, hardware) and in preparation for system tests that include interfacing hardware and software.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

133

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes5

SP 2.1 Track Change Requests
Added a note to subpractice 2 to remind the user that another aspect of change impact evaluation is the potential impact on release plans Added a new subpractice and notes 3. Categorize and prioritize change requests. Emergency requests are identified and referred to an emergency authority if appropriate. Changes are allocated to future baselines.

SP 2.2 Control Configuration Items

In subpractice 3, added examples of check-in and check-out steps

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

134

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes6

SP 3.1 Establish Configuration Management Records
In subpractice 2, added an example for communicating configuration status Automatically alerting relevant stakeholders when items are checked in or out or changed, or of decisions made regarding change requests.

SP 3.2 Perform Configuration Audits

Added notes to address configuration audits when configuration item related records exist in multiple databases or CM systems Clarified the explanation of functional configuration audits and physical configuration audits in examples of audit types Expanded subpractice 4 to also address the consistency of items in the CM system as part of maintaining the integrity of baselines

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

135

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models

CMMI-ACQ Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV CMMI-SVC

Made changes to informative material

Introductory Notes
Provided additional examples of work products to be placed under CM (service system architecture documentation and design data)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

136

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Decision Analysis and Resolution (DAR)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

137

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in DAR

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

138

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Provided guidance about clearly defining issues to assist in determining the scope of alternatives to be considered

SP 1.1 Establish Guidelines for Decision Analysis

Added an example for determining when to require a formal evaluation process (i.e., when competing quality attribute requirements would result in significantly different alternative architectures)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

139

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.2 Establish Evaluation Criteria
Provided guidance about developing a well-defined statement of the issue to be addressed and the decision to be made to focus the analysis In subpractice 1, added business value and impact on priorities as types of criteria to consider

SP 1.6 Select Solutions

Revised subpractice 2 to not only document results and rationale for a recommended solution but also to communicate results to appropriate stakeholders

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

140

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes to Other Models

Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

141

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Integrated Project Management (IPM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

142

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in IPM

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

143

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Goal Changes

Deleted specific goal 3 to remove IPPD additions
SG 3 Apply IPPD Principles The project is managed using IPPD principles.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

144

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Added SP 1.6 to retain the concept of teams since IPPD was deleted
SP 1.6 Establish Teams Establish and maintain teams. Establish the Projects Shared Vision Establish and maintain a shared vision for the project. Establish the Integrated Team Structure Establish and maintain the integrated team structure for the project. Allocate Requirements to Integrated Teams Allocate requirements, responsibilities, tasks, and interfaces to teams in the integrated team structure. Establish Integrated Teams Establish and maintain integrated teams in the structure. Ensure Collaboration among Interfacing Teams Ensure collaboration among interfacing teams.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

Deleted specific practices due to the elimination of the IPPD addition

SP 3.1 SP 3.2 SP 3.3

SP 3.4 SP 3.5

145

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Purpose Statement
Deleted the additional paragraph that addressed IPPD

Introductory Notes
Added a bullet that addressed teams when describing what this PA involves Reduced the use of the phrase product and product component throughout the PA to ensure broader applicability of IPM SPs in all three constellations Deleted the IPPD notes here and throughout the PA

SG 1 Use the Projects Defined Process

Added product delivery to the list of processes that the projects defined process should address

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

146

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.1 Establish the Projects Defined Process
In subpractice 1 example box, added examples of project characteristics that could affect the selection of lifecycle models (e.g., complexity, project strategy, clarity of requirements, etc.) In subpractice 3, added a note about measurement related tailoring In subpractice 5 example box, added code review as an example of a project activity covered by the projects defined process

SP 1.2 Use Organizational Process Assets for Planning Project Activities

Added a note When available, use results of previous planning and execution activities as predictors of the relative scope and risk of the effort being estimated. In subpractice 2, added an example of what an estimate typically involves Reasoning of a broad base of experienced project participants

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

147

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 1.3 Establish the Project's Work Environment
In subpractice 1, revised the note to emphasize exploring work environment functional and quality attributes with the same rigor as other projects In subpractice 1 example box of potential tradeoffs, replaced performance with quality attributes and added integration and automated test tools in the example box of equipment and tools

SP 1.4 Integrate Plans

In subpractice 1 example box, added verification and validation, transition to operations and support, staff training, and facilities and logistics as examples of other plans that affect the project

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

148

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes4

SP 1.5 Manage the Project Using Integrated Plans
Added a subpractice to remind the user that causal analysis to prevent recurrence of issues can be one of the actions taken to improve project or work performance 5. Address causes of selected issues that can affect project objectives.

SP 1.6 Establish Teams

Used this SP to consolidate and generalize the SPs deleted under SG 3 Addressed in the notes: motivation for use of teams, role of a projects shared vision in establishing teams, and determining which stakeholders to include a team Added four subpractices 1. Establish and maintain the projects shared vision. (old SP 3.1) 2. Establish and maintain the team structure. (old SP 3.2) 3. Establish and maintain each team. (old SP3.4) 4. Periodically evaluate the team structure and composition. (old SP3.4 subpractices)
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

149

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes5

SP 1.7 Contribute to Organizational Process Assets
Added examples of documentation for possible inclusion in the organizations process asset library in the example box under subpractice 3

SP 2.1 Manage Stakeholder Involvement

Added a reminder in subpractice 2 The work products produced to satisfy commitments can be services.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

150

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models1

CMMI-ACQ

Made changes to the informative material

SP 1.1 Establish the Projects Defined Process
In subpractice 1 example box that provides examples of project characteristics that could affect the selection of lifecycle models, added acquisition strategy

SP 2.1 Manage stakeholder involvement

Added a note to emphasize the importance of supplier agreements when the acquirers project produces a system that will be integrated into a larger system of systems

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

151

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models2

CMMI-SVC Renamed this PA to be Integrated Work Management

Made changes to the informative material

SP 1.3 Establish the Work Environment
In subpractice 1, added service management tools to the example box of equipment and tools

SP 1.4 Integrate Plans

Added a note that the work plan should include plans for service system development and service delivery

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

152

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Measurement and Analysis (MA)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

153

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

154

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Added a note to clarify the use of the word objective Measurement objectives are derived from information needs that come from project, organizational, or business objectives. In this process area, when the term objectives is used without the measurement qualifier, it indicates either project, organizational, or business objectives.

SP 1.1 Establish Measurement Objectives

Provided guidance that measurement objectives can also identify what change in behavior is desired as a result of implementing measurement activities Revised the example box on measurement objectives as part of a broader effort to distinguish between measurement objectives and information needs (e.g., provide insight into schedule fluctuation and progress replaced reduce time to delivery)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

155

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.2 Specify Measures
Added guidance on tracing measures to measurement information categories Added examples of commonly used base and derived measures that address information security and customer satisfaction Added a note and table that discusses the direct relationship between information needs, measurement objectives, measurement categories, base measures, and derived measures (Table MA.1, Example Measurement Relationships, provides examples of direct relationships.) Added a subpractice and note to describe interdependencies between measurement objectives and measures 2. Maintain traceability of measures to measurement objectives.

SP 1.3 Specify Data Collection and Storage Procedures

In subpractice 3, revised guidance to focus on collection and storage for later use in analysis

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

156

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 1.4 Specify Analysis Procedures
Provided guidance on accounting for the quality of data entering an analysis Analysis procedures should account for the quality (e.g., age, reliability) of all data that enter into an analysis (whether from the project, organizations measurement repository, or other source). The quality of data should be considered to help select the appropriate analysis procedure and evaluate the results of the analysis.

SP 2.4 Communicate Results

In subpractice 2, which addresses assisting relevant stakeholders in understanding results, revised the guidance to focus on communicating rather than just reporting

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

157

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models

CMMI-ACQ

Made changes to the informative material

SP 2.1 Obtain Measurement Data
Deleted notes that addressed collecting supplier measurement data to avoid duplication with material covered in the Agreement Management and Acquisition Technical Management process areas

CMMI-SVC Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

158

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Organizational Process Definition (OPD)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

159

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in OPD

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

160

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Due to the elimination of the IPPD addition, changed the former specific practice 2.2 to SP 1.7
SP 1.7 Establish Rules and Guidelines for Teams Establish and maintain organizational rules and guidelines for the structure, formation, and operation of teams.

Due to the elimination of the IPPD addition, demote SP 2.1, Establish Empowerment Mechanisms, to a subpractice in SP 1.7 Due to the elimination of the IPPD addition, delete SP 2.3, Balance Team and Home Organization Responsibilities

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

161

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Purpose Statement
Added rules and guidelines for teams to cover SP1.7 The purpose of Organizational Process Definition (OPD) is to establish and maintain a usable set of organizational process assets, and work environment standards, and rules and guidelines for teams.

Introductory Notes
Added guidance that the organizations set of standard processes (OSSP) can also describe standard interactions with suppliers Added guidance on how rules and guidelines can be used to deploy teams

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

162

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.1 Establish Standard Processes
In subpractice 1, added two examples of process elements addressing prequalifying suppliers as preferred suppliers and embedding process elements in workflow tools In subpractice 9, added examples of when the OSSP may need to be revised

SP1.3 Establish Tailoring Criteria and Guidelines

Added guidance that when there is a strong relationship to critical business objectives, less tailoring should be allowed Added guidance on other factors that tailoring can depend on Added procedures for adapting the organizations common measures to address information needs to the example box of criteria and procedures for tailoring the OSSP

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

163

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 1.4 Establish the Organizations Measurement Repository
In subpractice 2, added guidance on selecting standard measures for their ability to provide visibility into and focus on critical processes (An example is given related to agreement management.) In subpractice 3, characterized the functions of a measurement repository

SP 1.7 Establish Rules and Guidelines for Teams

Added guidance on the need to ensure rules and guidelines for teams to comply with all applicable laws and regulations Defined what is involved in structuring and forming teams Added operating rules for teams as an example work product Added a new subpractice and note that paraphrase the former SP 2.1 statement and its note that address empowerment mechanisms 1. Establish and maintain empowerment mechanisms to enable timely decision making.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

164

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models

Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

165

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Organizational Process Focus (OPF)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

166

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in OPF

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

167

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Simplified SP 3.4 compound practice statement (aligns with changes to GP 3.2)
SP 3.4 Incorporate Process-Related Experiences into the Organizational Process Assets Incorporate process-related experiences work products, measures, and improvement information derived from planning and performing the process into the organizational process assets.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

168

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Added guidance on evaluating customer satisfaction as a source for process improvements

SG 1 Determine Process Improvement Opportunities

Added guidance on sources of process improvement opportunities Changing business objectives, legal and regulatory requirements, and results of benchmarking studies.

SP 1.1 Establish Organizational Process Needs

Added issues related to customer satisfaction as important process considerations In subpractice 1, included a list of example ISO/IEC standards In subpractice 3, rewrote the list of example process performance objectives so that individually they are more complete and align better with similar examples found in MA, OPP, and other PAs

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

169

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.3 Identify the Organizations Process Improvements
In subpractice 2, added cost benefit analysis as an additional example technique to determine and prioritize possible improvements

SP 3.4 Incorporate Experiences into Organizational Process Assets

Changed subpractice 1 to close the loop between establishing process needs and objectives (SP 1.1) and SP 3.4 Conduct periodic reviews of the effectiveness and suitability of the organizations set of standard processes and related organizational process assets relative to the process needs and objectives derived from the organizations business objectives.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

170

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models

Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

171

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Organizational Training (OT)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

172

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

173

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Goal Changes

Changed the SG 1 statement to remove the term technical, which is unnecessarily limiting, not just in ACQ or SVC, but also in DEV
SG 1 Establish an Organizational Training Capability A training capability, which supports the roles in the organization organization's management and technical roles, is established and maintained.

Changed the SG 2 title and statement to remove the unnecessary and potentially confusing qualification
SG 2 Provide Necessary Training Training necessary for individuals to perform their roles effectively is provided.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

174

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Deleted the paragraph that began The phrase project and support groups

SP 1.1 Establish Strategic Training Needs

In subpractice 2, added examples of categories of training needs to broaden the list to include nontechnical examples team building, leadership, communication, and negotiation skills

SP 1.4 Establish a Training Capability

Changed subpractice 4 to include more than just instructors Develop or obtain qualified instructors, instructional designers, or mentors. In the note under subpractice 4, broadened the guidance from how to qualify instructors to how to qualify all who develop or deliver training, including selfstudy or online training

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

175

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 2.1 Deliver Training
In subpractice 3, broadened the first sentence of the guidance on who should deliver training from instructors to include others such as mentors and other appropriate training professionals

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

176

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models

CMMI-ACQ Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV CMMI-SVC Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

177

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Project Monitoring and Control (PMC)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

178

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in PMC

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

179

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

SP 1.1 Monitor Project Planning Parameters
Expanded the list of attributes of work products and tasks to include service levels and availability and mentioned considering the frequency with which the parameters should be monitored Added cost performance reports to the example work products In subpractice 3, added service levels to examples of work products whose attributes are typically measured

SP 1.3 Monitor Project Risks

In subpractice 2, added guidance on the importance of remaining attentive to new risks As projects progress (especially projects of long duration or continuous operation), new risks arise. It is important to identify and analyze these new risks. For example, software, equipment, and tools in use can become obsolete; or key staff can gradually lose skills in areas of particular long-term importance to the project and organization.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

180

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.4 Monitor Data Management
Revised guidance on monitoring data management activities to make its purpose more clear and added a discussion of replanning In subpractice 2, added stakeholder access to data as an example of a significant data management issue

SP 1.5 Monitor Stakeholder Involvement

Added guidance on when it may be necessary to re-plan stakeholder involvement Added an example for agile environments, in which customer and end-user involvement are key

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

181

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 1.6 Conduct Progress Reviews
Added an explanation to clarify what is meant by projects progress projects status as viewed at a particular time when the project activities performed so far and their results and impacts are reviewed with relevant stakeholders (especially project representatives and project management) to determine whether there are significant issues or performance shortfalls to be addressed. In subpractice 2, added a note that the measurements reviewed can include measures of customer satisfaction

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

182

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Component Changes4

SP 1.7 Conduct Milestone Reviews
Added an explanation to clarify what is meant by milestone Milestones are pre-planned events or points in time at which a thorough review of status is conducted to understand how well stakeholder requirements are being met. Mentioned that milestone reviews need not be held separately from progress reviews Mentioned that milestone reviews can cover project start-up and project closeout

SP 2.1 Analyze Issues

In subpractice 1 example box, examples of issues to be gathered for analysis were added Product, tool, or environment transition assumptions (or other customer or supplier commitments) that have not been achieved.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

183

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models

CMMI-ACQ

Made changes to the informative material

SP 1.3 Monitor Project Risks In the notes, changed performance requirements to functionality and quality attribute requirements when discussing possible supplier risks

CMMI-SVC Renamed this PA to be Work Monitoring and Control Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

184

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Project Planning (PP)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

185

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

186

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Deleted the statement planning begins with requirements that define the product and project so that the discussion of planning would be more broadly applicable to all constellations Added guidance that the project plan may be a stand-alone document or be distributed across multiple documents Provided guidance for product lines on the benefits of using this process area for creating and maintaining core assets, developing products to be built using core assets, and orchestrating the overall product line effort Added information about how Project Planning works with Agile methodologies

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

187

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SG 1 Establish Estimates
Revised the notes by deleting the long list of factors to consider when estimating project planning parameters to instead only refer to requirements associated with the project, its stakeholders, or that impact the project

SP 1.1 Estimate the Scope of the Project

Noted that the WBS can be structured according to products, work products, and tasks In subpractice 1, broadened the concept of WBS development to describing the project work, and removed notes that focused such activity on the product architecture, product, and product components

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

188

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 1.2 Establish Estimates of Work Product and Tasks Attributes
Added notes on service level and availability as attributes for estimating Restructured the example box into two example boxes, one for attributes used to estimate, and one for work products for which size estimates are made Added several examples of attributes to estimate and moved the example box of work products for which size estimates are made to subpractice 3 In subpractice 1, added quality attributes expected in the final product as part of the technical approach for the project In subpractice 2, deleted the example box of current methods to determine attributes due to the mismatch between the header and examples

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

189

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes4

SP 1.3 Define Project Lifecycle Phases
Added guidance about the definition of lifecycle phases to support logical decision points at which the appropriateness of continued reliance on the project plan and strategy is determined Added that explicit phases for project start-up and project close-out may be included in the project lifecycle

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

190

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes5

SP 2.1 Establish the Budget and Schedule
In subpractice 1, changed the description of milestones to be more complete Milestones are pre-planned events or points in time at which a thorough review of status is conducted to understand how well stakeholder requirements are being met. (If the project includes a developmental milestone, then the review is conducted to ensure that the assumptions and requirements associated with that milestone are being met.) Milestones can be associated with the overall project or a particular service type or instance. In subpractice 4, added customer priorities, marketable features, and end-user value as examples of tools and inputs that can help determine optimal ordering of activities In subpractice 6, as part of a discussion on corrective action criteria, indicated that the project plan defines when the criteria are applied and by whom

SP 2.2 Identify Project Risks

In subpractice 1 tools example box, changed performance models to process, project, and product performance models to be more inclusive

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

191

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes6

SP 2.3 Plan Data Management
Added two subpractices 4. Determine the requirements for providing access to and distribution of data to relevant stakeholders. 5. Decide which project data and plans require version control or other levels of configuration control and establish mechanisms to ensure project data are controlled.

SP 2.4 Plan the Projects Resources

Added status reports to the example work products Added two subpractices and associated notes 2. Determine communication requirements. 5. Determine other continuing resource requirements.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

192

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes7

SP 2.5 Plan Needed Knowledge and Skills
Added training plans to the example work products

SP 2.7 Establish the Project Plan

Added guidance on including lifecycle considerations that may be beyond the life of the project (e.g., transition to operations)

SP 3.2 Reconcile Work and Resource Levels

Modified guidance on how reconciliation is typically accomplished to replace lowering with modifying because requirements are not always lowered

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

193

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models1

CMMI-ACQ

Made changes to the informative material

SP 1.1 Establish the Acquisition Strategy Added consideration of modern engineering concepts (quality attributes, product line considerations) as part of establishing the acquisition strategy SP 1.3 Establish Estimates of Work Product and Task Attributes Added notes in subpractice 1 that the technical approach is often developed as part of and included in the acquisition strategy SP 2.1 Establish the Budget and Schedule Deleted the subpractice 6 notes paragraph that described the basis for corrective action criteria SP 2.6 Plan Stakeholder Involvement Added notes about working with suppliers that use an Agile method SP 2.7 Plan Transition to Operations and Support Added identification of the maintenance organization to the example box of items typically included in the plan
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

194

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models2

CMMI-SVC

Renamed this PA to be Work Planning Made changes to the informative material

Introductory Material
Removed the guidance that discussed how the term project related to services

SP 2.1 Establish the Budget and Schedule

Deleted the subpractice 6 notes paragraph that described the basis for corrective action criteria

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

195

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Process and Product Quality Assurance (PPQA)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

196

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in PPQA

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

197

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Changed designated to selected to convey that there should be a selection not just a designation of what to objectively evaluate SP 1.1 Objectively Evaluate Processes
Objectively evaluate selected the designated performed processes against the applicable process descriptions, standards, and procedures.

SP 1.2 Objectively Evaluate Work Products and Services

Objectively evaluate selected the designated work products and services against the applicable process descriptions, standards, and procedures.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

198

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Provided an additional example of a way to perform objective evaluations by building in fail-safe process checks into the process as in Poka-Yoke Improved the guidance on implementing peer reviews as an objective evaluation method by recommending creating checklists based on process descriptions, standards, and procedures recording noncompliance issues in the peer review report Softened the guidance that PPQA primarily applied to projects and work groups and added that it also applies to organizational activities and work products Provided guidance for Agile environments that the team discuss early how objective evaluations will be implemented, for which activities and work products, and how the results will be used

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

199

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.2 Objectively Evaluate Work Products
In subpractice 1, added guidance that work product selection can include services produced by a process whether the recipient of the service is internal or external to the project or organization Combined subpractices 4 and 5 into one about when to conduct objective evaluations and added examples of when work products might be evaluated (e.g., before delivery to customer, during delivery, incrementally, during unit testing, and during integration) 4. Evaluate selected work products at selected times.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

200

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

100

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models

CMMI-ACQ

Made changes to the informative material

Removed informative material throughout the process area related to evaluating supplier processes and products (e.g., supplier quality assurance activity and results) to avoid duplication with material covered in the Agreement Management and Acquisition Technical Management process areas CMMI-SVC Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

201

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Requirements Management (REQM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

202

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

101

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in REQM

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

203

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Revised the SP 1.5 practice statement to focus on ensuring alignment rather than finding inconsistencies
SP 1.5 Ensure Alignment Identify Inconsistencies Between Project Work and Requirements Ensure that Identify inconsistencies between the project plans and work products remain aligned and with the requirements.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

204

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

102

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Added service systems to the list of what is intended by the terms product or product component (This change was made in multiple PAs.) Added guidance for requirements changes in projects that deliver increments of capability For Agile environments, discussed mechanisms for communicating, tracking, and tracing requirements

SP1.1 Understand Requirements

Changed agreed-to set of requirements to approved set of requirements in multiple places including in the list of example work products In subpractice 2, provided additional examples of requirements evaluation and acceptance criteria
Consistent with overall architectural approach and quality attribute priorities Achievable Tied to business value Identified as a priority for the customer
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

205

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.3 Manage Requirements Changes
Changed the list of example work products to make them more representative Requirements change requests Requirements change impact reports Requirements status Requirements database Added a note in subpractice 3 about considering the impact to the product architecture as part of evaluating the impact of requirements changes from the standpoint of relevant stakeholders

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

206

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

103

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 1.4 Maintain Bidirectional Traceability of Requirements
Revised the notes after the specific practice statement to clarify that work products are included in bidirectional traceability and added examples of aspects of traceability to consider Scope of traceability: The boundaries within which traceability is needed Definition of traceability: The elements that need logical relationships Type of traceability: When horizontal and vertical traceability is needed In subpractice 2, moved the particular types of work products for which traceability can be maintained from the subpractice statement to a note and included architecture and development iterations (or increments) as examples

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

207

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models

CMMI-ACQ Made no substantive changes beyond harmonization changes and those described in CMMI-DEV CMMI-SVC

Made changes to the informative material

Introductory Notes
Revised notes to clarify that customer requirements for services are often identified in written agreements

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

208

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

104

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Risk Management (RSKM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

209

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in RSKM

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

210

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

105

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Revised specific practice 3.1 statement to explicitly tie risk mitigation planning back to the risk management strategy (SP1.3)
SP 3.1 Develop Risk Mitigation Plans Develop a risk mitigation for the most important risks to the project as defined by plan in accordance with the risk management strategy.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

211

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Stated that risk management must address both technical and nontechnical sources of risks because too often the focus is on technical sources only Added an example of risks arising from making architecture decisions early before implications can be better understood Added guidance that industry standards can help when determining how to prevent or mitigate risks commonly found in a particular industry Added an example of integrating risk management practices in Agile environments (Agile methods have risk management activities embedded within them but these typically omit some sources of risk or consistency in their treatment.)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

212

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

106

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.1 Determine Risk Sources and Categories
In subpractice 1, added typical risk sources Competing quality attribute requirements that affect solution selection and design Regulatory constraints (e.g. security, safety, environment)

SP 1.2 Define Risk Parameters

Added guidance about documenting the parameters used to analyze and categorize risks for later use and to maintain consistency in the treatment of risks Added guidance for using techniques such as failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) In subpractice 1, added a statement about comparing dissimilar risks One way of providing a common basis for comparing dissimilar risks is assigning dollar values to risks (e.g., through a process of risk monetization).

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

213

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 1.3 Establish a Risk Management Strategy
Added guidance about developing the risk management strategy early in the project so there is more time to be proactive and strategic when allocating resources to identify and address critical risks

SP 2.1 Identify Risks

In subpractice 1, added business objectives to cost, schedule, and performance as sources of risks that should be examined

SP 2.2 Evaluate, Categorize and Prioritize Risks

In subpractice 1, mentioned risk monetization again

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

214

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

107

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models1

CMMI-ACQ

Made changes to the informative material

SP 1.1 Determine Risk Sources and Categories
In subpractice 1, added a typical risk source Supplier architectural decisions that affect quality attribute requirements or acquirers business objectives

SP 3.1 Develop Risk Mitigation Plans

In subpractice 1, added an item to the example work products Disaster recovery or continuity plans

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

215

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models2

CMMI-SVC

Made changes to the informative material

SP 1.1 Determine Risk Sources and Categories
In subpractice 1, added a typical risk source Architectural decisions that affect quality attribute requirements (e.g., for capacity and availability) for the service system or business objectives

SP 2.1 Identify Risks

In subpractice 1, revised performance risk examples by changing functional performance and operation to service system behavior and operation with respect to functionality or quality attributes

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

216

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

108

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Supplier Agreement Management (SAM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

217

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SAM

Made no substantive changes to specific goals Revised the wording in SP1.3, Establish Supplier Agreements, from formal agreements to supplier agreements Demoted SP 2.2, Monitor Selected Supplier Processes, and SP 2.3, Evaluate Selected Supplier Work Products, to subpractices of SP 2.1, Execute the Supplier Agreement Revised the practice SP2.3 (previously numbered as SP 2.5), Ensure Transition of Products, so that it covers situations where the product or service is delivered directly from the supplier to the customer or end user Added the following terms to the glossary: acquirer, contractual requirements, deliverable, solicitation package, and supplier agreement Clarified the scope of SAM practices applicability Added the concept products and processes of significant value to the project to help determine what to monitor and evaluate
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

218

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

109

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes1

Revised the wording in SP1.3 to remove formal and replace it with supplier since the glossary definition addresses the formality of the agreements
SP 1.3 Establish Supplier Agreements Establish and maintain formal supplier agreements with the supplier.

Demoted what were SP 2.2, Monitor Selected Supplier Processes, and SP 2.3, Evaluate Selected Supplier Work Products, to subpractices of SP 2.1, Execute the Supplier Agreement Renumbered SP 2.4, Accept the Acquired Product, and SP2.5, Ensure Transition of Products, to reflect this change

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

219

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes2

Revised SP2.3, Ensure Transition of Products, to allow its applicability to times when the product or service is delivered directly to the customer or end user from the supplier
SP 2.53 Ensure Transition of Products Ensure Transition the transition of acquired products acquired from the supplier to the project.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

220

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

110

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Purpose Statement
Expanded the purpose statement to include services The purpose of Supplier Agreement Management (SAM) is to manage the acquisition of products and services from suppliers.

Introductory Notes
Clarified the scope of SAM to include services, service systems, and modified commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components Clarified when SAM should be used when acquiring COTS COTS applies in cases where there are modifications to COTS components, government off-the-shelf components, or freeware, that are of significant value to the project or that represent significant project risk. Replaced formal agreement with supplier agreement since the definition of supplier agreement addresses formality Added information to describe that the PA typically is not implemented when the supplier is also the projects customer

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

221

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.1 Determine Acquisition Type
Added obtaining products from a preferred supplier as an example acquisition type

SP 1.2 Select Suppliers

Added example of customer satisfaction with similar products delivered by the supplier as a method of supplier evaluation

SP 1.3 Establish Supplier Agreements

Modified the definition of supplier agreement to state any written agreement and provided guidance on selecting and monitoring selected supplier processes and evaluating selected supplier work products Provided guidance on when there is need for legal review

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

222

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

111

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 2.1 Execute the Supplier Agreement
Added new subpractices 2 and 3 to address selecting, monitoring, and evaluating processes and work products of the supplier (by demoting former SP 2.2 and 2.3) In subpractice 6, added an example of reviewing for legal compliance

SP 2.2 Accept the Acquired Product

Added acceptance reviews as an example work product

SP 2.3 Ensure Transition of Products

Clarified the applicability of this practice only to products that are not services Clarified that the acquired product could also be transferred to the customer or end user (not just to the project)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

223

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Additional Unique Changes in Other Models

CMMI-SVC

Made changes to the informative material

Introductory Notes
Added suppliers of reuse libraries as a form of supplier

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

224

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

112

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary: Specific Goal Changes

IPM
SG 3 Apply IPPD Principles

OPD
SG 2 Enable IPPD Management

OT
SG 1 Establish an Organizational Training Capability A training capability, which supports the roles in the organization organization's management and technical roles, is established and maintained. SG 2 Provide Necessary Training Training necessary for individuals to perform their roles effectively is provided.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

225

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary: Specific Practice Changes1

IPM
SP 3.1 SP 3.2 SP 3.3 SP 3.4 SP 3.5 SP 1.6 Establish the Projects Shared Vision Establish the Integrated Team Structure Allocate Requirements to Integrated Teams Establish Integrated Teams Ensure Collaboration among Interfacing Teams Establish Teams Establish and maintain teams.

OPD
SP 1.7 Establish Rules and Guidelines for Teams Establish and maintain organizational rules and guidelines for the structure, formation, and operation of teams.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

226

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

113

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary: Specific Practice Changes2

PPQA
SP 1.1 Objectively evaluate selected the designated performed processes against the applicable process descriptions, standards, and procedures. SP 1.2 Objectively Evaluate Work Products and Services Objectively evaluate selected the designated work products and services against the applicable process descriptions, standards, and procedures.

REQM
SP 1.5 Ensure Alignment Identify Inconsistencies Between Project Work and Requirements Ensure that Identify inconsistencies between the project plans and work products remain aligned and with the requirements.

RSKM
SP 3.1 Develop Risk Mitigation Plans Develop a risk mitigation plan in accordance with for the most important risks to the project as defined by the risk management strategy.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

227

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary: Specific Practice Changes3

SAM
SP 1.3 Establish formal supplier agreements with the supplier.

Demoted what were SP 2.2, Monitor Selected Supplier Processes, and SP 2.3, Evaluate Selected Supplier Work Products, to subpractices in new SP 2.1, Execute the Supplier Agreement
SP 2.53 Ensure Transition of Products Ensure Transition the transition of acquired products acquired from the supplier to the project.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

228

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

114

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213

SCAMPI and SCAMPI Lead Appraiser are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

230

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

115

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Purpose
This module provides a description of the changes for each of the process areas that are unique to CMMI-ACQ.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

231

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Topics
Agreement Management (AM) Acquisition Requirements Development (ARD) Acquisition Technical Management (ATM) Acquisition Validation (AVAL) Acquisition Verification (AVER) Solicitation and Supplier Agreement Development (SSAD)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

232

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

116

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Agreement Management (AM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

233

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

234

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

117

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes

SP 1.1 Execute the Supplier Agreement
Changed an example work product from supplier project progress and performance reports to acquisition project progress and performance reports Deleted a note under subpractice 4 The acquirers evaluation of supplier performance is carried out primarily to confirm the suppliers competency or lack of competency relative to performing similar work on the project or other projects.

SP 1.2 Monitor Selected Supplier Processes

Added guidance in the notes on determining the levels to which the selected supplier processes should be monitored

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

235

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Acquisition Requirements Development (ARD)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

236

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

118

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in ARD

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

237

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Added and revised the informative material throughout the process area to appropriately mention the following engineering concepts:
quality attributes (i.e., non-functional requirements or ilities) product lines system of systems architecture-centric practices allocation of product capabilities to release increments technology maturation

These concepts are mentioned in example boxes, examples provided in the notes, and discussion that mentions various approaches that can be used. When functional requirements are discussed, mention of quality attributes is added to balance the view of requirements.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

238

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

119

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

Introductory Notes
Added notes emphasizing the criticality of quality attributes to customer satisfaction

SP 1.1 Elicit Stakeholder Needs

Added to and amended the example box of elicitation techniques Noted that scenarios used with customers during elicitation activity may be operational, sustainment, and development oriented. Added customer or end user satisfaction surveys as an elicitation technique.

SP 3.1 Establish Operational Concepts and Scenarios

Added notes and modified subpractice 1 to highlight the inclusion of transition, sustainment, operations, and installation as lifecycle considerations when developing operational concepts and scenarios

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

239

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 3.3 Analyze Requirements to Achieve Balance
Added an item to the list of example work products Proposed requirements changes. Added a new subpractice about performing a cost benefit analysis to assess requirements impact 4. Perform a cost benefit analysis to assess impact of the requirements on the overall acquisition strategy and acquisition project costs and risks.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

240

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

120

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Acquisition Technical Management (ATM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

241

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in ATM

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

242

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

121

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Added and revised the informative material throughout the process area to appropriately mention the following engineering concepts
quality attributes (i.e., non-functional requirements or ilities) product lines system of systems architecture-centric practices allocation of product capabilities to release increments technology maturation

These concepts are mentioned in example boxes, in examples provided in the notes, and in discussion that mentions various approaches that can be used. When functional requirements are discussed, mention of quality attributes is added to balance the view of requirements.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

243

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

Introductory Notes
Added to the purpose of supplier prototypes, simulations and technology demonstrations that they are used to help gauge technical progress, gauge readiness for technical reviews, assess technical risks, and gain knowledge needed to manage selected interfaces Added guidance for instances when the acquirer manages a supplier who is using an Agile method

SP 1.2 Analyze Selected Technical Solutions

Added notes to subpractice 4 on conducting technical interchange meetings One of the purposes of these meetings is to discuss and understand issues encountered during acquirer analyses or provided results of supplier verification activities.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

244

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

122

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Acquisition Validation (AVAL)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

245

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in AVAL

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

246

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

123

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes

Introductory Notes
Expanded the definition of when validation occurs, including that validation is performed early (concept/explorations phases) and incrementally throughout the project lifecycle (including transition to operations and sustainment)

SP 1.1 Select Products for Validation

Added an example of a validation method End-of-cycle or end-of-phase reviews (with customer or end-user) for incremental or iterative development

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

247

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Acquisition Verification (AVER)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

248

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

124

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in AVER

Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Added architecture evaluations as an additional method of verification

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

249

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes

SG 1 Prepare for Verification
Added architecture evaluations as an additional method of verification

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

250

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

125

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Solicitation and Supplier Agreement Development (SSAD)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

251

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SSAD

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

252

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

126

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Changed the SP 1.3 statement to be less subjective
SP 1.3 Review the Solicitation Package Review the solicitation package with relevant stakeholders to obtain commitment ensure that the approach is realistic and can reasonably lead to the approach acquisition of a usable product.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

253

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes

SP 1.1 Identify Potential Suppliers
Added preferred supplier information to the notes In some cases, the organization prequalifies preferred suppliers from which an acquirer can choose provided the preferred suppliers meet the specific needs of the project. Choosing from preferred suppliers can greatly reduce the effort and time required for solicitation.

SP 1.2 Establish a Solicitation Package

Added compliance to quality attribute requirements to the examples of areas used to evaluate supplier abilities in subpractice 3

SP 2.3 Select Suppliers

Added a note to subpractice 1 stating that the evaluation of supplier proposals includes an evaluation of past performance

SP 3.1 Establish an Understanding of the Agreement

Added a note that the acquirer should review requirements of the agreement with the supplier and end user to establish a mutual understanding of the agreement
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

254

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

127

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary: Specific Goal and Practice Changes

Made no changes to specific goals Made changes to a specific practice in the following process area
SSAD SP1.3 Review the solicitation package with relevant stakeholders to obtain commitment ensure that the approach is realistic and can reasonably lead to the approach acquisition of a usable product.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

255

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213

SCAMPI and SCAMPI Lead Appraiser are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

128

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

257

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Purpose
This module provides a description of the changes for each of the process areas that are unique to CMMI-DEV.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

258

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

129

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Topics
Requirements Development (RD) Technical Solution (TS) Product Integration (PI) Verification (VER) Validation (VAL)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

259

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Requirements Development (RD)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

260

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

130

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

261

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Goal Changes

Changed the SG 3 statement to broaden its application beyond functional requirements
SG 3 Analyze and Validate Requirements The requirements are analyzed and validated, and a definition of required functionality is developed.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

262

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

131

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Changed the SP 1.2 title to read more like the practice statement and modified to emphasize that the result is prioritized customer requirements
SP 1.2 Transform Stakeholder Needs into Develop the Customer Requirements Transform stakeholder needs, expectations, constraints, and interfaces into prioritized customer requirements.

Changed the SP 3.2 title and statement to add an equal emphasis on non-functional requirements
SP 3.2 Establish a Definition of Required Functionality and Quality Attributes Establish and maintain a definition of required functionality and quality attributes.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

263

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

264

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

132

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

Introductory Notes
Deleted notes that addressed changes to requirements Added information on how Requirements Development works with Agile methodologies

SP 1.1 Elicit Needs

Added an example work product Results of requirements elicitation activities.

SP 1.2 Transform Stakeholder Needs into Customer Requirements

Added a new subpractice 2 2. Establish and maintain a prioritization of customer functional and quality attribute requirements.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

265

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Technical Solution (TS)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

266

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

133

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

267

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Changed the SP 1.2 statement to reduce the subjectivity of the word best
SP 1.2 Select Product Component Solutions Select the product component solutions based on selection that best satisfy the criteria established.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

268

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

134

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

269

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

Introductory Notes
Added information on how Technical Solution works with Agile methodologies Added technology maturation and obsolescence as drivers of requirements changes in maintenance and sustainment projects

SP 1.1 Develop Alternative Solutions and Selection Criteria

Added risk to cost, schedule, and performance as a factor used to analyze alternative solutions

SP 2.2 Establish a Technical Data Package

Deleted notes defining technical data package and added a reference to the glossary Added a new subpractice 2. Determine the views to be used to document the architecture.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

270

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

135

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 2.3 Design Interfaces Using Criteria
Added to the description of interface designs

SP 2.4 Perform Make, Buy, or Reuse Analyses

Added guidance on implementing decisions to purchase off-the-shelf product components

SP 3.1 Implement the Design

In subpractice 1, added aspect oriented programming as a software coding methods example

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

271

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Product Integration (PI)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

272

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

136

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

273

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Terminology
Revised the terminology used from a emphasis on integration sequence to an emphasis on integration strategy
The product integration strategy describes the approach for receiving, assembling, and evaluating the product components that comprise the product.

Established a new phrase, integration strategy, procedures, and criteria to use for clarity throughout the process area

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

274

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

137

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes1

Changed the SP 1.1 title and statement to replace integration sequence with integration strategy
SP 1.1 Establish an Determine Integration Strategy Sequence Establish and maintain a Determine the product component integration strategy sequence..

Changed the SP 3.1 statement to replace function with behavior in order to encompass non-functional requirements
SP 3.1 Confirm Readiness of Product Components for Integration Confirm, prior to assembly, that each product component required to assemble the product has been properly identified, behaves functions according to its description, and that the product component interfaces comply with the interface descriptions.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

275

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes2

Changed the SP 3.2 statement to replace integration sequence with integration strategy
SP 3.2 Assemble Product Components Assemble product components according to the product integration strategy sequence and available procedures.

Changed the SP 3.4 statement to remove the subjective word appropriate

SP 3.4 Package and Deliver the Product or Product Component Package the assembled product or product component and deliver it to the appropriate customer.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

276

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

138

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Added material to incorporate modern engineering practices, such as quality attributes, product lines, system of systems, architecture-centric practices, allocation of product capabilities to release increments, and technology maturation (This change resulted in changes to informative material throughout the process area.) Changed integration sequence to integration strategy, adding guidance throughout the process area informative material where appropriate

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

277

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

Introductory Notes
Added information on how Product Integration works with Agile methodologies Added additional guidance that managing interfaces is not limited to user interfaces, but also apply to interfaces among components of the product, including internal and external data sources, middleware, and other components that may or may not be within the development organizations control but on which the product relies

SP1.1 Establish an Integration Strategy

Removed notes regarding preparation for integration Added a list of items that an integration strategy addresses Notes that the results of developing a product integration strategy are typically documented in a product integration plan Added guidance for identifying and selecting from alternative integration strategies

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

278

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

139

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Verification (VER)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

279

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in VER

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

280

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

140

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Introductory Notes
Added guidance for product lines For product lines, core assets and their associated product line variation mechanisms must also be verified. Added deliberate refactoring and pair programming as additional examples of peer review methods Added discussion of verification and validation in Agile environments

SG 1 Prepare for Verification

Added architecture evaluations as an additional method of verification

SP 1.1 Select Work Products for Verification

Added additional examples of verification methods software architecture evaluation conformance evaluation continuous integration (i.e., Agile approach)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

281

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 1.3 Establish Verification Procedures and Criteria
Added new example of sources of verification criteria embedded customers reviewing work products collaboratively with developers

SP 2.1 Prepare for Peer Reviews

In subpractice 1, added an additional example of types of peer reviews architecture implementation conformance evaluation.

SP 2.3 Analyze Peer Review Data

In subpractice 4, added additional examples of peer review data that can be analyzed user stories or case studies associated with a defect and the end users and customers who are associated with defect.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

282

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

141

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Validation (VAL)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

283

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in VAL

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

284

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

142

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes

SP 1.1 Select Products for Validation

Added additional examples of products and product components that can be validated access protocols data interchange reporting formats Added an example of a validation method incremental delivery of working and potentially acceptable product

SP 2.2 Analyze Validation Results

Added a new subpractice 6 to address corrective action (similar to VER) 6. Provide information on how defects can be resolved (including validation methods, criteria, and validation environment) and initiate corrective action.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

285

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary: Specific Goal Changes

RD
SG 3 The requirements are analyzed and validated, and a definition of required functionality is developed.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

286

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

143

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary: Specific Practice Changes1

RD
SP 1.2 Transform Stakeholder Needs into Develop the Customer Requirements Transform stakeholder needs, expectations, constraints, and interfaces into prioritized customer requirements. SP 3.2 Establish a Definition of Required Functionality and Quality Attributes Establish and maintain a definition of required functionality and quality attributes.

TS
SP 1.2 Select the product component solutions based on selection that best satisfy the criteria established.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

287

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary: Specific Practice Changes2

PI
SP 1.1 Establish an Determine Integration Strategy Sequence SP 3.1 Confirm, prior to assembly, that each product component required to assemble the product has been properly identified, behaves functions according to its description, and that the product component interfaces comply with the interface descriptions. SP 3.2 Assemble product components according to the product integration strategy sequence and available procedures. SP 3.4 Package the assembled product or product component and deliver it to the appropriate customer.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

288

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

144

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213

SCAMPI and SCAMPI Lead Appraiser are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

290

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

145

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Purpose
This module provides a description of the changes for each of the process areas that are unique to CMMI-SVC.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

291

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Topics
Capacity and Availability Management (CAM) Incident Resolution and Prevention (IRP) Service Continuity (SCON) Service Delivery (SD) Service System Development (SSD) Service System Transition (SST) Strategic Service Management (STSM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

292

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

146

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Capacity and Availability Management (CAM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

293

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in CAM

Made no substantive changes to specific goals, specific practices, or terminology Provided guidance relating CAM to quality attributes

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

294

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

147

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes

Introductory Notes
Explained that capacity and availability are quality attributes

Related Process Areas

Added an SSD Addition reference Refer to the Service System Development process area for more information about developing service systems.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

295

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Incident Resolution and Prevention (IRP)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

296

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

148

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in IRP

Restructured IRP SG 2 and SG 3 to more clearly distinguish between the scope of each goal (SG 2 focuses on timely management of individual incidents, and SG 3 focuses on defining approaches to reducing impacts of future incidents.) Added the concept of identifying a previously established workaround or known reusable solution to handle an incident similar to past incidents in SG 2 and SG 3 Clarified the SP 3.1 title and practice statement to reflect that for selected incidents, underlying causes are analyzed Added examples and guidance to informative material

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

297

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Terminology
Explicitly defined the term workaround
A workaround is a less-than-optimal solution for a certain type of incident that is nevertheless effective enough to use until a better solution can be developed and deployed.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

298

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

149

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Goal Changes

Changed the SG 2 title and statement to focus on managing individual incidents
SG 2 Identify, Control, and Address Individual Incidents Individual incidents are identified, controlled, and addressed.

Changed the SG 3 title and statement to focus on the analysis of selected incidents to define how to address similar incidents in the future
SG 3 Define Approaches to Analyze and Address Causes and Impacts of Selected Incidents Approaches to address Causes and impacts of selected incidents are defined to prevent analyzed and addressed.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

299

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes1

Changed the SP 2.2 title and statement to focus on individual incident data, and removed the subjectivity of the best course of action
SP 2.2 Analyze Individual Incident Data Analyze individual incident data to determine the best a course of action. Apply Workarounds to Selected Resolve Incidents Apply workarounds to selected Resolve incidents.

Changed the SP 2.3 title and statement to resolve incidents

SP 2.3

Removed SP 2.4, Address Underlying Causes of Selected Incidents, because it is already covered by SP 3.3 subpractice 2 Changed what was SP 2.5 (now SP 2.4) statement to emphasize management of incidents and remove the implications of if necessary
SP 2.54 Monitor the Status of Incidents to Closure Monitor Manage the status of incidents to closure and escalate if necessary.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

300

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

150

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes2

Clarified the SP 3.1 title and practice statement to reflect that for selected incidents, underlying causes are analyzed
SP 3.1 Analyze Selected Incident Data Incidents Select and Analyze the underlying causes of selected incidents.

Changed the SP 3.2 title and statement to focus on solutions for responding to future incidents
SP 3.2 Plan Actions Establish Solutions to Address Underlying Causes of Selected Respond to Future Incidents Identify the underlying causes of selected incidents Establish and create maintain solutions to respond to future incidents.

Changed the SP 3.3 title and statement to focus on reducing future incident occurrence
SP 3.3 Establish Workarounds for Selected Incidents and Apply Solutions to Reduce Incident Occurrence Establish and maintain workarounds for apply solutions to reduce the occurrence of selected incidents.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

301

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Changes to IRP in CMMI V1.31

Changes to Goals
SG 2 Identify, Control, and Address Individual Incidents Individual incidents are identified, controlled, and addressed. SG 3 Define Approaches to Analyze and Address Causes and Impacts of Selected Incidents Approaches to address Causes and impacts of selected incidents are analyzed and addressed.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

302

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

151

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Changes to IRP in CMMI V1.32

Changes to Practices
SP 2.2 Analyze Individual Incident Data Analyze individual incident data to determine athe best course of action. SP 2.3 Resolve Apply Workarounds to Selected Incidents Resolve Apply workarounds to selected incidents. SP 2.4 Address Underlying Causes of Selected Incidents Address underlying causes of selected incidents. SP 2.54 Monitor the Status of Incidents to Closure Monitor the status of incidents to closure and escalate if necessary. SP 2.65 Communicate the Status of Incidents Communicate the status of incidents.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

303

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Changes to IRP in CMMI V1.32

Changes to Practices
SP 3.1 SP 3.2 Analyze Selected Incidents Incident Data Analyze Select and analyze the underlying causes of selected incidents. Plan Actions to Address Underlying Causes of Selected Incidents Identify the underlying causes of selected incidents and create an action proposal to address these causes. Establish Solutions to Respond to Future Incidents Establish and maintain solutions to respond to future incidents. Establish Workarounds for Selected Incidents Establish and maintain workarounds for selected incidents. Establish and Apply Solutions to Reduce Incident Occurrence Establish and apply solutions to reduce the occurrence of selected incidents.

SP 3.2 SP 3.3 SP 3.3

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

304

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

152

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

SG2 Identify, Control, and Address Individual Incidents
Added guidance to talk about the focus of this goal The focus of this goal is on managing individual incidents as they occur to restore service or otherwise resolve the incidents as quickly as possible. Managing individual incidents can also include handling multiple related incidents through actions that focus on completing or restoring already affected service delivery.

SP 2.2 Analyze Individual Incident Data

Added the concept of identifying a previously established workaround or known reusable solution to handle an incident similar to past incidents

SP 2.3 Resolve Incidents

Added the concept of applying workarounds or other previously established reusable solutions to reduce the impact of incidents, which would otherwise each have to be handled on a case-by-case basis

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

305

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

SP 2.4 Monitor the Status of Incidents to Closure
Moved escalate incidents as necessary to subpractice 2 2. Escalate incidents as necessary.

SP 2.5 Communicate the Status of Incidents

Added guidance about communication and coordination of staff Communication and coordination between incident resolution staff and service delivery staff may be appropriate to prevent incident resolution actions from interfering with ongoing service delivery. Added status reports as an example work product

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

306

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

153

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SG3 Analyze and Address Causes and Impacts of Selected Incidents
Added guidance about the focus of this goal The focus of this goal is on reducing the impact or occurrence of future incidents. The practices in this goal cover the analysis of selected incidents to define how to address similar incidents in the future. The results of this analysis are fed back to those who control and address incidents, and can also lead to the prevention of certain types of incidents.

SP 3.1 Analyze Selected Incidents

Added a note to emphasize the importance of having a single repository established that contains all known incidents, their underlying causes, and approaches to addressing these underlying causes Added a new subpractice 4. Determine the best overall approach for dealing with selected incidents in the future.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

307

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 3.2 Establish Solutions to Respond to Future Incidents
Added the concept of identifying a previously established workaround or known reusable solution to handle an incident similar to past incidents Added reusable solution description and instructions, contribution to collection of workarounds for incidents, and workaround verification results as example work products Added four new subpractices 1. Determine which group is best suited to establish and maintain a reusable solution. 2. Plan and document the reusable solution. 3. Verify and validate the reusable solution to ensure that it effectively addresses the incident. 4. Communicate the reusable solution to relevant stakeholders.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

308

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

154

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes4

SP 3.3 Establish and Apply Solutions to Reduce Incident Occurrence
Added guidance for managing the action to closure Added updated incident management record as an example work product Added three new subpractices to address the underlying cause 6. Address the underlying cause by implementing the action proposal that resulted from the analysis of the incidents underlying causes. 7. Manage the actions until the underlying cause is addressed. 8. Record the actions and result. Added a reference to SSD in subpractice 6 Added examples of escalation criteria in subpractice 7

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

309

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Service Continuity (SCON)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

310

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

155

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SCON

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

311

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Terminology
Explicitly defined the term essential function
Essential functions are those functions that must be sustained in an emergency or significant disruption of services.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

312

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

156

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Changed the SP 3.3 title and statement to focus on verification and validation of the service continuity plan
SP 3.3 Analyze Results of Verification and Validation of the Service Continuity Plan Analyze the results of verifying validation and validating the service continuity plan verification activities.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

313

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Service Delivery (SD)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

314

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

157

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

315

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes

SP 3.1 Receive and Process Service Requests
Added a note to subpractice 6 to provide guidance to maintain traceability to requirements when the resolution to a service request results in changes to the service system If the actions taken result in changes to the service system, further actions may also be needed to ensure traceability to requirements.

SP 3.2 Operate the Service System

Added guidance to subpractice 2 on providing operations support activities Among the support activities service providers perform during operation, service providers can provide customer and end user training or orientation as needed. Added a new subpractice, corresponding note, and reference to CAM that addresses controlling other quality attributes in addition to security associated with service delivery (e.g., capacity, availability, responsiveness, usability, reliability, and safety) 5. Manage and control other operationally oriented quality attributes associated with service delivery.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

316

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

158

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Service System Development (SSD)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

317

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SSD

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

318

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

159

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Changed the SP 1.1 statement to emphasize that the result is prioritized stakeholder requirements
SP 1.1 Develop Stakeholder Requirements Collect and transform stakeholder needs, expectations, constraints, and interfaces into prioritized stakeholder requirements.

Changed the SP 1.3 statement to include quality attributes as part of analyzing and validating requirements
SP 1.3 Analyze and Validate Requirements Analyze and validate requirements, and define required service system functionality and quality attributes.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

319

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes1

Added material to incorporate modern engineering practices, such as quality attributes, architecture-centric practices, allocation of service system capabilities to release increments, and technology maturation (This change resulted in changes to informative material throughout the process area.)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

320

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

160

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes2

Introductory Notes
Added information on how Service System Development works with Agile methodologies

SP 1.1 Develop Stakeholder Requirements

Added notes that organizational needs are part of the basis for determining stakeholder requirements Added organizational standards for product lines and standard services to the list of examples of stakeholder requirements

SP 1.2 Develop Service System Requirements

Added a new subpractice 4. Prioritize derived requirements. Changed what was subpractice 4 (now subpractice 5) to include allocating requirements to logical entities and other entities, in addition to service system components, as appropriate

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

321

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Informative Material Changes3

SP 1.3 Analyze and Validate Requirements
Added scenarios and user stories to the example work products In subpractice 1, added operations, installation, and development to the list of operational concepts and scenarios that are developed Moved (and expanded) notes regarding operational concept and scenario development from subpractice 1 to subpractice 2

SP 2.1 Select Service System Solutions

Added a note to subpractice 3 In high-risk situations, simulations, prototypes or pilots can be used to assist in the evaluation.

SP 2.2 Develop the Design

Added a note to subpractice1 describing preliminary and detailed design

SP 2.3 Ensure Interface Compatibility

Added guidance in subpractice 2 for the management of interfaces

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

322

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

161

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes4

SP 2.5 Integrate Service System Components
Added a new subpractice 1. Develop a service system integration strategy. Changed integration sequence to integration strategy throughout the SP 2.5 informative material where appropriate

SP 3.3 Verify Selected Service System Components

Added a note to subpractice 1 Verification of the selected components includes verification of their integrated operation with one another and with appropriate external interfaces.

SP 3.4 Validate the Service System

Clarified the scope of validation by revising the notes to refer to validation of actual service system operation rather than to validation in general

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

323

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Service System Transition (SST)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

324

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

162

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in SST

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

325

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Changed the SP 1.1 statement to include quality attributes in the analysis of service system transition needs
SP 1.1 Analyze Service System Transition Needs Analyze the functionality, quality attributes, and compatibility of the current and future service systems to minimize impact on service delivery.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

326

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

163

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes

SG 1 Prepare for Service System Transition
Added notes on evaluating the potential impact of service system transition on quality attributes

SP 1.1 Analyze Service System Transition Needs

In subpractice 3, added quality attributes as a potential issue when analyzing service system components that are proposed for transition

SP 1.2 Develop Service System Transition Plans

Added identification and resolution of warranty considerations as an item to be included in transition plans when appropriate

SP 2.2 Assess and Control the Impacts of the Transition

Added an evaluation of the effects of service system transition on quality attributes as part of post-deployment review

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

327

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Strategic Service Management (STSM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

328

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

164

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of Changes in STSM

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

329

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

Removed the unnecessary term relevant from the SP 1.1 title
SP 1.1 Gather and Analyze Relevant Data

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

330

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

165

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Informative Material Changes

SP 1.2 Establish Plans for Standard Services
Added notes to subpractice 3 for establishing and maintaining core assets (e.g., components, tools, architectures, operating procedures, service system representations, software) to more effectively and efficiently develop or customize service systems that deliver standard services to multiple customers

SP 2.1 Establish Properties of Standard Services and Service Levels

Added a new example work product Needs and expectations for service systems that deliver standard services Added a new subpractice 7. Identify needs and expectations for service systems that deliver standard services as appropriate.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

331

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary: Specific Goal Changes

IRP
SG2 Identify, Control, and Address Individual Incidents SG 3 Define Approaches to Analyze and Address Causes and Impacts of Selected Incidents

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

332

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

166

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary: Specific Practice Changes1

IRP
SP 2.2 SP 2.3 SP2.4 SP 2.54 SP 3.1 SP 3.2 SP 3.3 Analyze Individual Incident Data Apply Workarounds to Selected Resolve Incidents Address Underlying Causes of Selected Incidents Monitor the Status of Incidents to Closure Analyze Selected Incident Data Incidents Plan Actions Establish Solutions to Address Underlying Causes of Selected Respond to Future Incidents Establish Workarounds for Selected Incidents and Apply Solutions to Reduce Incident Occurrence Analyze Results of Verification and Validation of the Service Continuity Plan

SCON
SP 3.3

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

333

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary: Specific Practice Changes2

SSD
SP1.3 Analyze and validate requirements, and define required service system functionality and quality attributes.

SST
SP 1.1 Analyze the functionality, quality attributes, and compatibility of the current and future service systems to minimize impact on service delivery.

SSM
SP 1.1 Gather and Analyze Relevant Data

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

334

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

167

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

336

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

168

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Purpose
The purpose of this module is to do the following:
Review the high maturity concepts Summarize high maturity changes for CMMI V1.3

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

337

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Topics
High Maturity Overview Key Terminology Organizational Process Performance (OPP) Quantitative Process Management (QPM) Causal Analysis and Resolution (CAR) Organizational Performance Management (OPM) Summary

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

338

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

169

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

High Maturity Overview

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

339

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Why Change High Maturity for V1.3?

High maturity concepts and terminology were confusing. High maturity requirements were implied versus explicit and contained in other documents than the model. Explanations were not central or consistent.
Explanations were often provided in the model, the high maturity audit criteria, other high maturity presentations (i.e., Healthy Ingredients), or the Understanding CMMI High Maturity Practices course.

There were inaccurate perceptions about high maturity.

Customers Maturity level 5 is expensive and no better than maturity level 3. Industry Maturity level 5 is NOT RIGHT for every business.

High maturity concepts were present in ALL constellations, but in much of the material all the examples focused on development.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

340

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

170

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

What Is High Maturity All About?1

Organizations and projects establish quantitative quality and process performance objectives based on the organizations business objectives and the needs of project customers and end users. Organizations and projects select subprocesses aligned with the quality and process performance objectives and identify associated measures that support subprocess performance analysis. Process performance baselines and models are created and used for quantitative management of the selected subprocesses. Projects are managed using statistical and other quantitative techniques (including process performance baselines and models) to achieve quality and process performance objectives.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

341

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

What Is High Maturity All About?2

Causal analysis is performed to identify root causes of positive or negative process outcomes (e.g., successes and deficiencies) related to quality and process performance objectives. Root causes of deficiencies are corrected to enable achievement of objectives. Root causes of successes are applied to the projects processes and may be submitted to the organization for broader application. Organizations periodically review business objectives and maintain quality and process performance objectives accordingly. Statistical and other quantitative techniques (including process performance baselines and models) are used to understand process performance and target areas for improvement that would enable achievement of the objectives.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

342

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

171

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

High Maturity Is not Management by Rear-View Mirror

Many uses of measurement at maturity levels 1-3 are purely retrospective: Do you know where you are (actual vs. plan)? Do you know what corrective action to take? It is difficult to use these types of measurement results to answer the following questions: Will you be successful? What if you were to do something different?

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

343

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

High Maturity Is Management with a Navigation System

High maturity organizations use measurements proactively to understand where they are, where they are going, and their capability to meet business and customer expectations; to understand variation in process performance and its impact on achieving objectives; to predict the results of process changes; to help projects understand their role in business success by achieving applicable business objectives; and to make quantitative management part of routine project management activity.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

344

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

172

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

High Maturity PAs Relationships1

Improvements Performance issues Progress toward achieving quality & process Organization performance objectives Quality & process performance Organizational objectives Performance

Causal Analysis and Resolution

Root cause solutions Selected outcomes

Improvement Proposals

Management
Organizational Quality & process performance objectives

Quantitative Project Management

Updated measures, baselines and models (actual performance)

Organizational Process Performance

Quality & process performance objectives

Customer
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

345

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

High Maturity PAs Relationships2

Organizational Process Performance (OPP)
Organizational quality and process performance objectives are established based on business objectives. Historical project measurement data are used to create process performance baselines and models for use in quantitative management (see QPM, CAR, and OPM.)

Quantitative Project Management (QPM)

Projects establish quality and process performance objectives based on those selected from the organization (OPP) and the needs of customers and end users. Projects may adjust or add to organizational objectives as necessary to create the projects objectives. Projects use statistical and other quantitative techniques in their activities to plan and manage progress against their objectives. Techniques include using organizational process performance models and baselines (OPP) and/or process performance models and baselines created from their own project data.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

346

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

173

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

High Maturity PAs Relationships3

Causal Analysis and Resolution (CAR)
Projects and organizations perform causal analysis and resolution on selected outcomes. When quality and process performance objectives are not being achieved, CAR is used to identify corrective action solutions. CAR is also used to identify causes for success that may result in process improvement proposals for the organization (see OPM).

Organizational Performance Management (OPM)

Business objectives are reviewed and quality and process performance objectives managed for use by the organization (see OPP) and projects (see QPM). Organizations compare objectives to historical performance data. Measures, process performance baselines and models from OPP are used to understand process performance, target areas for continuing improvement, and evaluate the impact of proposed improvements.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

347

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Key Terminology

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

348

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

174

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Key Terminology1
causal analysis The analysis of defects outcomes to determine their cause causes. process performance A measure of actual results achieved by following a process. (See also measure)
Process performance is characterized by both process measures (e.g., effort, cycle time, defect removal efficiency) and product or service measures (e.g., reliability, defect density, response time).

process performance baseline A documented characterization of the actual results achieved by following a process performance, which may include central tendency and variation. (See also process performance)
A process performance baseline can be is used as a benchmark for comparing actual process performance against expected process performance.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

349

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Key Terminology2
process performance model A description of relationships among the measurable attributes of one or more processes or work products that is developed from historical process performance data and calibrated using collected process and product measures from the project and that is used to predict future performance. (See also measure)
One or more of the measureable attributes represent controllable inputs tied to a subprocess to enable performance of what-if analyses for planning, dynamic replanning, and problem resolution. Process performance models include statistical, probabilistic and simulation based models that predict interim or final results by connecting past performance with future outcomes. They model the variation of the factors, and provide insight into the expected range and variation of predicted results. A process performance model can be a collection of models that (when combined) meet the criteria of a process performance model.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

350

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

175

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Key Terminology3
quality and process performance objectives Quantitative objectives and requirements for product quality, service quality, and process performance.
Quantitative process performance objectives include quality; however, to emphasize the importance of quality in the CMMI Product Suite, the phrase quality and process performance objectives is used. Process performance objectives are referenced in maturity level 3; the term quality and process performance objectives implies the use of quantitative data and is only used in maturity levels 4 and 5.

quantitative management Managing a project or work group using statistical and other quantitative techniques to build an understanding of the performance or predicted performance of processes in comparison to the projects or work groups quality and process performance objectives, and identifying corrective action that may need to be taken. (See also statistical techniques)
Statistical techniques used in quantitative management include analysis, creation, or use of process performance models, analysis, creation, or use of process performance baselines; use of control charts; analysis of variance, regression analysis; and use of confidence intervals or prediction intervals, sensitivity analysis, simulations, and tests of hypotheses.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

351

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Key Terminology4
stable process The state in which all special causes of process variation have been removed and prevented from recurring so that only the common causes of process variation of the process remain. (See also capable process, common cause of variation, special cause of variation, and standard process)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

352

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

176

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Key Terminology5
statistical and other quantitative techniques Analytic techniques that enable accomplishing an activity by quantifying parameters of the task (e.g., inputs, size, effort, and performance). (See also statistical techniques and quantitative management.)
This term is used in the high maturity process areas where the use of statistical and other quantitative techniques to improve understanding of project, work, and organizational processes is described. Examples of non-statistical quantitative techniques include trend analysis, run charts, Pareto analysis, bar charts, radar charts, and data averaging. The reason for using the compound term statistical and other quantitative techniques in CMMI is to acknowledge that while statistical techniques are expected, other quantitative techniques can also be used effectively.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

353

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Key Terminology6
statistical techniques An analytic technique that employs statistical methods (e.g., statistical process control, confidence intervals, and prediction intervals). Techniques adapted from the field of mathematical statistics used for activities such as characterizing process performance, understanding process variation, and predicting outcomes.
Examples of statistical techniques include sampling techniques, analysis of variance, chisquared tests, and process control charts.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

354

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

177

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Organizational Process Performance (OPP)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

355

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in OPP

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

356

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

178

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes1

SP 1.31 Establish Quality and Process- Performance Objectives
Establish and maintain the organizations quantitative objectives for quality and process performance for the organization, which are traceable to business objectives.

SP 1.12 Select Processes

Select the processes or subprocesses in the organizations set of standard processes that are to be included in the organizations processperformance analyses and maintain traceability to business objectives.

SP 1.23 Establish Process- Performance Measures

Establish and maintain definitions of the measures that are to be included in the organizations processperformance analyses.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

357

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes2

SP 1.4 Analyze Process Performance and Establish ProcessPerformance Baselines
Establish Analyze the performance of the selected processes, and establish and maintain the organization's processperformance baselines.

SP 1.5

Establish Process- Performance Models

Establish and maintain the processperformance models for the organizations set of standard processes.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

358

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

179

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Quantitative Project Management (QPM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

359

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in QPM

360

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

180

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Goal Changes

SG 1 Quantitatively Manage the ProjectPrepare for Quantitative Management
Preparation for quantitative management is conducted.The project is quantitatively managed using quality and process-performance objectives.

SG 2 StatisticallyQuantitatively Manage Subprocess Performancethe Project

The performance of selected subprocesses within the project's defined process is statistically managed.The project is quantitatively managed.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

361

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes1

SP 1.1 Establish the Projects Objectives
Establish and maintain the projects quality and processperformance objectives.

SP 1.2

Compose the Defined Process

Select the subprocesses that Using statistical and other quantitative techniques, compose the projects a defined process based on historical stabilitythat enables the project to achieve its quality and capability data process performance objectives.

SP 1.3

Select the Subprocesses that Will Be Statistically Managed and Attributes

Select the Subprocesses that Will Be Statistically Managedand Attributes.Select subprocesses and attributes critical to evaluating performance and that help to achieve the projects quality and process performance objectives.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

362

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

181

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes2

SP 21.4 Select Measures and Analytic Techniques
Select the measures and analytic techniques to be used in statistically managing the selected subprocesses quantitative management.

SP 2.31

Monitor the Performance of the Selected Subprocesses

Monitor the performance of the selected subprocesses to determine their capability to satisfy their qualityusing statistical and processperformance objectives, and identify corrective action as necessaryother quantitative techniques.

SP 2.2

Apply Statistical Methods to Understand Variation

Establish and maintain an understanding of the variation of the selected subprocesses using the selected measures and analytic techniques.

SP 1.42.2 Manage Project Performance

MonitorManage the project using statistical and other quantitative techniques to determine whether or not the projects objectives for quality and process performance will be satisfied, and identify corrective action as appropriate.
2010 Carnegie Mellon University

363

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes2

SP 2.3 Perform Root Cause Analysis
Perform root cause analysis of selected issues to address deficiencies in achieving the projects quality and process performance objectives.

SP 2.4

Record Statistical Management Data

Record statistical and quality management data in the organizations measurement repository.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

364

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

182

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Causal Analysis and Resolution (CAR)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

365

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in CAR

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

366

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

183

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Goal Changes

SG 1 Determine Causes of Selected OutcomesDefects
Root causes of selected outcomesdefects and other problems are systematically determined.

SG 2 Address Causes of Selected OutcomesDefects

Root causes of selected outcomesdefects and other problems are systematically addressed to prevent their future occurrence.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

367

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes

SP 1.1 Select OutcomesDefect Data for Analysis
Select outcomesthe defects and other problems for analysis.

SP 1.2 Analyze Causes

Perform causal analysis of selected outcomesdefects and other problems and propose actions to address them.

SP 2.1 Implement the Action Proposals

Implement the selected action proposals that were developed in causal analysis.

SP 2.2 Evaluate the Effect of Implemented ActionsChanges

Evaluate the effect of implemented actionschanges on process performance.

SP 2.3 Record Data

Record causal analysis and resolution data for use across projectsthe project and the organization.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

368

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

184

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Organizational Performance Management (OPM)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

369

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of Changes in OPM (old OID)

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

370

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

185

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Goal Changes

SG 1 Manage Business Performance
The organizations business performance is managed using statistical and other quantitative techniques to understand process performance shortfalls, and to identify areas for process improvement.

SG 12 Select Improvements
ProcessImprovements are proactively identified, evaluated using statistical and technology improvements, which contribute to other quantitative techniques, and selected for deployment based on their contribution to meeting quality and processperformance objectives, are selected.

SG 23 Deploy Improvements
Measurable improvements to the organizations processes and technologies are continually and systematically deployed and evaluated using statistical and other quantitative techniques.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

371

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes1

SP 1.1 Maintain Business Objectives
Maintain business objectives based on an understanding of business strategies and actual performance results.

SP 1.2 Analyze Process Performance Data

Analyze process performance data to determine the organizations ability to meet identified business objectives.

SP 1.3 Identify Potential Areas for Improvement

Identify potential areas for improvement that could contribute to meeting business objectives.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

372

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

186

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes2

SP 1.1 Collect and Analyze Improvement Proposals
Collect and analyze process- and technology-improvement proposals.

SP 2.1 Elicit Suggested Improvements

Elicit and categorize suggested improvements.

SP 1.2 Identify and Analyze Innovations

Identify and analyze innovative improvements that could increase the organizations quality and process performance.

SP 2.2 Analyze Suggested Improvements

Analyze suggested improvements for their possible impact on achieving the organizations quality and process performance objectives.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

373

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes3

SP 1.3 Pilot Improvements
Pilot process and technology improvements to select which ones to implement.

SP 2.3

Validate Improvements
Validate selected improvements.

SP 12.4 Select and Implement Improvements for Deployment

Select process and technology improvements for deployment across the organization. Select and implement improvements for deployment throughout the organization based on an evaluation of costs, benefits, and other factors.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

374

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

187

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Specific Practice Changes4

SP 23.1 Plan the Deployment
Establish and maintain the plans for deploying the selected process and technology improvements.

SP 23.2 Manage the Deployment

Manage the deployment of the selected process and technology improvements.

SP 23.3 MeasureEvaluate Improvement Effects

MeasureEvaluate the effects of the deployed process and technology improvements on quality and process performance using statistical and other quantitative techniques.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

375

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

376

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

188

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training November 2010

November 2010

Summary of CMMI V1.3 High Maturity Changes1

Generic Goals 4 and 5 were eliminated.
The concept of capability levels 4 and 5 was removed.

Organizational Process Performance was reordered.

Establish Quality and Process Performance Objectives was moved from SP 1.3 to SP 1.1.

Quantitative Project Management was reordered and modified.

Specific goal 1 is now Prepare for Quantitative Management. Select Measures and Analysis Techniques was moved from SP 2.1 to SP 1.4. Use of statistical and other quantitative techniques is explicit in SP 1.2, Composing the Defined Process. Specific goal 2 is now Quantitatively Manage the Project. New SP 2.3 added Perform Root Cause Analysis. Old SP 2.4, Record Statistical Management Data, was removed.

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

377

CMMI Version 1.3 Model Upgrade Training

November 2010

Summary of CMMI V1.3 High Maturity Changes2

The scope of Causal Analysis and Resolution was changed.
Defects and other problems was replaced by outcomes, which can be successes as well as deficiencies. The emphasis on proactive defect prevention was increased.

Organizational Innovation and Deployment was expanded and titled Organizational Performance Management to emphasize its business performance focus.
Specific goal 1, Manage Business Performance, was added. SP 1.1 Maintain Business Objectives SP 1.2 Analyze Process Performance Data SP 1.3 Identify Potential Areas for Improvement Specific goal 2, Select Improvements, was modified. Incremental and innovative improvement threads were merged into a common improvement thread through analysis, validation, and selection for deployment (with a focus on performance improvement).

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

378

2010 Carnegie Mellon University

189

App-3 - CMMI V3.0 - Predefined Model Views - Maturity and Capability Levels
No ratings yet
App-3 - CMMI V3.0 - Predefined Model Views - Maturity and Capability Levels
7 pages
CMMI V2 0 Quick Reference Guide
100% (1)
CMMI V2 0 Quick Reference Guide
15 pages
CMMI V2.0 Overview
100% (4)
CMMI V2.0 Overview
28 pages
Role of International Logistics in Global Procurement
100% (2)
Role of International Logistics in Global Procurement
65 pages
CMMI Adoption Guidance
100% (1)
CMMI Adoption Guidance
76 pages
CMMI Questionnaire
No ratings yet
CMMI Questionnaire
1 page
Illustrator Contract
No ratings yet
Illustrator Contract
4 pages
CMMI v.2 0 Model Excerpt Estimating Practice Area Models
No ratings yet
CMMI v.2 0 Model Excerpt Estimating Practice Area Models
32 pages
Cmmi Level 2 Guide
No ratings yet
Cmmi Level 2 Guide
10 pages
Complaint Affi Estafa bp22
100% (1)
Complaint Affi Estafa bp22
5 pages
CMMI DAR Effectively Apply The Decision Analysis and Resolution (DAR) Process
100% (1)
CMMI DAR Effectively Apply The Decision Analysis and Resolution (DAR) Process
26 pages
Fixed Assets Procedures
50% (2)
Fixed Assets Procedures
20 pages
Dabur India Ltd.
100% (1)
Dabur India Ltd.
52 pages
CMMI® Training Deck PDF
100% (1)
CMMI® Training Deck PDF
35 pages
Changes in Cmmi 2.0 and How They Can Affect Tmmi
No ratings yet
Changes in Cmmi 2.0 and How They Can Affect Tmmi
21 pages
Cmmi v2 0 Slides 180509082920
100% (3)
Cmmi v2 0 Slides 180509082920
164 pages
EPCH Director Oct 22 Final
No ratings yet
EPCH Director Oct 22 Final
1,012 pages
Workbook Unit 6
No ratings yet
Workbook Unit 6
6 pages
CMMI v1.4 PDF
100% (1)
CMMI v1.4 PDF
204 pages
CMMI DEV Gap Analysis WorkBook
No ratings yet
CMMI DEV Gap Analysis WorkBook
162 pages
Generator Circuit Breaker Brochure Retrofit Application Brochure GB FR FR PDF
No ratings yet
Generator Circuit Breaker Brochure Retrofit Application Brochure GB FR FR PDF
8 pages
PFEMA Attachment B Rev 16fe15
No ratings yet
PFEMA Attachment B Rev 16fe15
1 page
Model Overview Practical Experience
100% (2)
Model Overview Practical Experience
54 pages
Introduction To CMMI V2
100% (1)
Introduction To CMMI V2
75 pages
CMMI V2 0 Model at A Glance - Print Ready - ENG - 2019 04 29v2 2
No ratings yet
CMMI V2 0 Model at A Glance - Print Ready - ENG - 2019 04 29v2 2
7 pages
.AJK TEVTA. - Rules & Regulations
No ratings yet
.AJK TEVTA. - Rules & Regulations
53 pages
CMMI - Appraisal - Results - An Example
33% (3)
CMMI - Appraisal - Results - An Example
30 pages
CMMIv 2
No ratings yet
CMMIv 2
32 pages
56 Performance Contract
100% (1)
56 Performance Contract
8 pages
Cmmi Lessons Learned
100% (1)
Cmmi Lessons Learned
265 pages
Direct Method
No ratings yet
Direct Method
2 pages
Aug2018.CMMI V2
100% (1)
Aug2018.CMMI V2
45 pages
Business Plan
No ratings yet
Business Plan
32 pages
CMMI
No ratings yet
CMMI
84 pages
Standard CMMI Appraisal Method For Process Improvement (Scampi), Method Definition Document
No ratings yet
Standard CMMI Appraisal Method For Process Improvement (Scampi), Method Definition Document
245 pages
CMMI 2018 Keith
No ratings yet
CMMI 2018 Keith
156 pages
Overview of CMMI For Assessment
100% (2)
Overview of CMMI For Assessment
58 pages
CMMI For Services CMMI-SVC
100% (1)
CMMI For Services CMMI-SVC
31 pages
CMMI Implementation
100% (3)
CMMI Implementation
20 pages
Convergence & Co-Existence of TOGAF, COBIT & ITIL in Planning & Implementing Business Strategy
No ratings yet
Convergence & Co-Existence of TOGAF, COBIT & ITIL in Planning & Implementing Business Strategy
16 pages
Information Technology Basics
100% (3)
Information Technology Basics
12 pages
Cmmi Project Management
No ratings yet
Cmmi Project Management
35 pages
Map Greenbelt Rockwell
No ratings yet
Map Greenbelt Rockwell
1 page
Cmmi Tutorial
67% (3)
Cmmi Tutorial
72 pages
Bridging The Gap Between Operational Technology and Information Technology
No ratings yet
Bridging The Gap Between Operational Technology and Information Technology
8 pages
MSF For Cmmi Process Improvement v5 Process Guidance
No ratings yet
MSF For Cmmi Process Improvement v5 Process Guidance
68 pages
CMMI V2 0 Performance Summary Results - FINAL
No ratings yet
CMMI V2 0 Performance Summary Results - FINAL
86 pages
1.what Is Staged and Continuous Models in CMMI?
No ratings yet
1.what Is Staged and Continuous Models in CMMI?
23 pages
CMMI
No ratings yet
CMMI
8 pages
Cmmi Scampi
No ratings yet
Cmmi Scampi
119 pages
Capability Maturity Model Integration: Submitted To
100% (1)
Capability Maturity Model Integration: Submitted To
15 pages
CMMI Accelerated
No ratings yet
CMMI Accelerated
108 pages
Introduction To CMMI Appraisals
No ratings yet
Introduction To CMMI Appraisals
5 pages
Impairment of Assets
No ratings yet
Impairment of Assets
2 pages
CB Research Proposal Dominos
No ratings yet
CB Research Proposal Dominos
7 pages
Brand Activation Manager
No ratings yet
Brand Activation Manager
3 pages
Fee Voucher Fee Voucher Fee Voucher Voucher # 527102 Voucher # 527102 Voucher # 527102
No ratings yet
Fee Voucher Fee Voucher Fee Voucher Voucher # 527102 Voucher # 527102 Voucher # 527102
1 page
CMMI Awareness
No ratings yet
CMMI Awareness
14 pages
Slide Deck Performing A Cobit 5 Process Maturity Assessment in Iserver
No ratings yet
Slide Deck Performing A Cobit 5 Process Maturity Assessment in Iserver
18 pages
Cmmi 2
No ratings yet
Cmmi 2
16 pages
Fundamental and Technical Analysis OF
No ratings yet
Fundamental and Technical Analysis OF
8 pages
Mapping CMMI Project Management Process Areas To SCRUM Practices
No ratings yet
Mapping CMMI Project Management Process Areas To SCRUM Practices
10 pages
CMMI
No ratings yet
CMMI
10 pages
CMMI V2 Crosswalk v.4
No ratings yet
CMMI V2 Crosswalk v.4
26 pages
Basic Accounting Principles and Concepts
100% (1)
Basic Accounting Principles and Concepts
2 pages
CMMI Maturity Levels
No ratings yet
CMMI Maturity Levels
5 pages
CMMI V2 0 Model at A Glance - Print Ready - ENG - 2019 04 29v2 3
No ratings yet
CMMI V2 0 Model at A Glance - Print Ready - ENG - 2019 04 29v2 3
7 pages
Birmingham Water - AL
No ratings yet
Birmingham Water - AL
4 pages
7 ISOversusCMMI
No ratings yet
7 ISOversusCMMI
5 pages
5.2.tax Avoidance - Does Tax-Specific Industry Expertise Make A Difference
No ratings yet
5.2.tax Avoidance - Does Tax-Specific Industry Expertise Make A Difference
30 pages
Stephen Covey
No ratings yet
Stephen Covey
12 pages
v1.3 Scampi A Checklist Template
No ratings yet
v1.3 Scampi A Checklist Template
50 pages
Opp Mot Dismiss Western Sugar Co-Op V Archer-Daniels-Midland
No ratings yet
Opp Mot Dismiss Western Sugar Co-Op V Archer-Daniels-Midland
120 pages
CMMI V2 0 Adoption Transition Guidance
No ratings yet
CMMI V2 0 Adoption Transition Guidance
48 pages
Capability Maturity Model Integration - Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia
No ratings yet
Capability Maturity Model Integration - Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia
8 pages
Changes in CMMI V3
No ratings yet
Changes in CMMI V3
1 page
Cmmi For Service
No ratings yet
Cmmi For Service
49 pages
CMMI Acquisition Handbook
No ratings yet
CMMI Acquisition Handbook
13 pages
Inventory Control - Arun Gupta
No ratings yet
Inventory Control - Arun Gupta
17 pages
Why Should You Care About Cmmi?: Suzanne Garcia Smg@sei - Cmu.edu
No ratings yet
Why Should You Care About Cmmi?: Suzanne Garcia Smg@sei - Cmu.edu
19 pages
OPM3 CMMI Comparison
No ratings yet
OPM3 CMMI Comparison
4 pages
Dr. Sean Kincaid Anti-Kickback Whistleblower Retaliation Suit
100% (1)
Dr. Sean Kincaid Anti-Kickback Whistleblower Retaliation Suit
14 pages
CMMI Whitepaper
No ratings yet
CMMI Whitepaper
8 pages
List of Prequalified Registered Suppliers
No ratings yet
List of Prequalified Registered Suppliers
12 pages
Cmmi Trainingslides Overview 20250225
No ratings yet
Cmmi Trainingslides Overview 20250225
32 pages
Acct Statement XX7068 24062024
No ratings yet
Acct Statement XX7068 24062024
2 pages
Vendor Agreement Form
No ratings yet
Vendor Agreement Form
3 pages
Cmmi Implementation Guide
From Everand
Cmmi Implementation Guide
Vishnuvarthanan Moorthy
No ratings yet
Disaster Recovery Business Continuity Complete Self-Assessment Guide
From Everand
Disaster Recovery Business Continuity Complete Self-Assessment Guide
Gerardus Blokdyk
No ratings yet
Business Continuity Strategy Complete Self-Assessment Guide
From Everand
Business Continuity Strategy Complete Self-Assessment Guide
Gerardus Blokdyk
No ratings yet