1. Lessons learned about multiple model appraisals
(CMMI for Services and CMMI for Development)
How to get costs reduction
Ramiro Carballo
Certified SCAMPI Lead Appraiser
Caelum, Information & Quality Technology
Madrid, 13-11-2013

2. Lessons learned about multiple model
appraisals
How to get costs reduction
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
Abstract
Most of the companies that had an appraisal experience using
CMMI-DEV as reference model in the past, considered out of
the scope an important part of the company, related with service
delivery. During a multiple model (or multi-model) appraisal,
consultancy services, software maintenance or IT management
areas can be included in the same organizational scope as
software development areas, reducing the effort and cost of
multiple appraisals.
raisal:
esses by a
SCAMPI app
or more proc
on of one
ppraisal
An examinati
ls using an a
rofessiona
ining, at a
ed team of p
train
sis for determ
el as the ba
, using the
ference mod
re
weaknesses
ngths and
inimum, stre
m
D.
SCAMPI MD
2

3. Lessons learned about multiple model
appraisals
How to get costs reduction
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
Agenda
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
CMMI DEV vs. CMMI SVC
How to define the organizational scope
How to select appropriate objective evidence
Practices interpretation from services point of view
Appraisal participants
Appraisal team members
The evidence database
Quantifying savings
3

4. CMMI DEV vs. CMMI SVC
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
The constellations CMMI for Development and CMMI for
Services have a common set of 17 process areas. The 5
engineering process areas are exclusive from development
activities, so they are only included in CMMI-DEV.
In the same way, typical services process areas are focused
on continuity (SCON), capacity and availability (CAM),
incidents (IRP), transition (SST), strategy (STSM), delivery
(SD) and development (SSD).
d
use
are
hat and
t
st
nts ials,
tere
in
ne
r
mpo mate area of
n:
g
I co
atio f CMM trainin for an ices).
ll
te
,
v
s
ons ction o odels ument nt, ser
C
lle
tm
oc
me
A co onstruc lated d velop
e
to c isal re ition, d
ra
s
app , acqui
.
(e.g
4

5. Identifying services
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
It is easy to identify which company activities could be
improved applying the benefits of these process areas,
because most of the companies implement some kind of
services model as part of their business model.
5

6. Organizational Scope
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
It is important to identify which services should be included in
the organizational scope of a multiple model appraisal,
because they should be representative of the organizational
improvement.
The information about selected services is detailed in the
public record of the CMMI Institute, and, usually, marketing
departments are very interested in increasing the visibility of
the principal services the company offers to its customers.
it:
l Un
na
atio e
e
iz
gan of th here th e
r
O
b
e
w
piec ation lts can
A
iz
u
rgan isal res
o
.
ra
app ralized
e
gen
e:
cop
lS
ona cts or
ati
aniz of proje vides
Org set
pro
f
e
that ence o tion.
Th ices
nta
v id
serv ctive e pleme
obje tices im
prac
6

7. Effort related with the number of selected services
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
One consideration about this services selection is that each
kind of service is usually considered a subgroup. So, one or
more basic units of each kind of service will be sampled, and
the appraisal effort will increase as the number of samples
does.
Consultancy services, software maintenance or testing
services are usually included inside the organizational scope,
together with the software development projects, reducing the
effort of multiple SCAMPI appraisals.
so
ject
pro
up:
gro imilar
Sub t of s
A se ices
serv
r
7

8. Appropriate Objective evidence
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
Objective evidence must be provided for each sampled basic
unit, considering that they have been collected to provide
evidence on the instantiation of a service practice or a
development practice.
Each objective evidence must be analyzed according to the
meaning of the model practice we are evaluating.
8

9. How to discover the services point of view
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
It is a failure when, after passing a CMMI DEV appraisal,
someone comments: now, we are going to implement CMMI
SVC maturity level 2, because, it is only one more process
area (SD, service delivery), and we have all others fully
implemented, recently.
The right interpretation is that SD is the unique new process
area that is only applicable to services basic units.
But the rest of maturity level 2 process areas must be
objectively evidenced for services basic units and also for
development basic units. Twice !
9

10. Discovering basic units that are service and project
at the same time
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
Some synergies of service management and project
management could help the organization to identify a set of
projects that are directly related with a set of services, trying
to reduce the number of artifacts in the appraisal.
But the use of these artifacts must be evaluated twice: from
the services perspective and from the development one.
ce
nit: Servi
U
a
asic ect or
B
roj
AP
10

11. Multi-purpose appraisal participants
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
Using the same point of view, the selection of the appraisal
participants should consider the role of each person in each
basic unit, from the service and the development perspective.
For example, a project management activity can solve a
capacity requirement, a project monitoring activity can solve
an incident management issue, and a risk management
activity can be considered part of a service continuity plan.
11

12. © 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
Practices Interpretation issues
Depending on the experience of the process team, the
appraisal team could discuss some practices interpretation
issues during the appraisal: how to estimate software versus
how to estimate services, differences between software
configuration management and service configuration
management, and the relationship with a CMDB
(Configuration Management DataBase), and others...
12

13. Experience of appraisal team members
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
Because of that, it is required that the appraisal team
members have enough training and experience in
development and in services, so they can evaluate the
correct implementation of both kind of practices in the
appropriate environment.
ence:
Experi
bers
m Mem
l Tea
as t
praisa
ge of at le
Ap
• An avera
f
ld
ts:
Constrain
up)
(as a gro
The team
of at
25
e a total
gate of
m us t hav
f
• An aggre
n years o
eld
least te
years of fi
to
ent
relating
ch o
of fie
managem
experience f each of
mbers, ea
six years
nd at least
luding
of
to
l team me
erience, a
exp
m us t
dividua
o years
ence exc
e conten
In
th
ls
t tw
experi
member
of the
of
nce mode
ve at leas
one team
whom ha
experience ader, the refere
ix years
g the type
the
ast s
performin
the
al
team le
have at le
excluding
experience ed in each apprais
sa
appraisal
s
ontent of
of the
erience a
res
the c
of exp
This
experience
work add
relating to
xcluding
ader.
included.
ce
–e
model
team le
e referen
has field
manager
appraisal
reference
m em be r
each of th
s
t the
al team
sures tha
each team
d model. odels. This ensure
e apprais
th
clude
This en
means
m
ole has a leader.
ith each in
ers with
w
wh
memb
team as a
experience
e
that team
experienc
ely limited
bstantial
su
relativ
their
are
to support
experience thers who base
by o
dgments
balanced
vel of ju
greater le
have a
.
experience
.
13

14. Sharing the PIID with both models
The CMMI Institute provides a structured spreadsheet that is
the usual way to implement the evidence database, named
PIID. (Practice Implementation Indicator Description)
PIID: http://cmmiinstitute.com/assets/SVC_PIIDs_20110608.xlsx
Each page contains the set of evidence of an individual
process area. The appraisal team can use the same page for
both process areas with the same name in both models.
Source of OE
Document (s)
Comments
Artifact
Key Practice / Notes
Affirmation
Status
Estadisticas
ORG
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
Configuration Management
Information
Needed
Rating
(FI, LI, PI,
NI, NY)
SG1 Baselines of identified work products are established.
Identify configuration items, components, and related work products to be placed under
FI
SP1.1 configuration management.
1
2
Appraisal Considerations:
- Be sure to consider configuration items representative of all disciplines and processes within the assessment
scope and context. In a sense, this SP specifies the constraints under which the remaining SPs should be
considered and assessed
- See model for definition and description of configuration item and its work product components
- See model for typical examples of work products that may be part of a configuration item (e.g. process
Artifact Examples:
- Identified configuration items
- Configuration management lifecycle for controlled items (e.g., owner, point at which placed under control, degree of
control, change approval.)
- Configuration management plan
Elementos bajo gestión de la configuración del proyecto: Plan de Proyecto, apartado datos y configuración. Items
con sus respectivas lineas bases
SCRUM
Plan de Proyecto
SCRUM
x
x
x
X
14

15. Work vs. Project
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
The same criterion can be used for WMC (Work Monitoring
and Control) versus PMC (Project Monitoring and Control)
and WP (Work Planning) versus PP (Project Planning), but
special consideration must be taken for this last case,
because WP has one more specific practice that PP.
ates
h Estim Strategy
stablis
v ic e
G1 : E
S
Work
he Ser
WP
blish t Scope of the
Esta
Work
SP 1.1 stimate the
ates of
E
SP 1.2 stablish Estim tes
E
ib u
SP 1.3 nd Task Attr Phases
ta
le
Produc efine Lifecyc nd Cost
D
ta
SP 1.4 stimate Effor
E
SP 1.5
tegy
he stra following
egy :T
e Strat eration of the
Servic consid
el of
ate lev d
es
propri
includ
t an ap bjectives an ble
a
factors
eo
ssi
tion: Th e service. Po
abstrac ts for th
se
ting tho he
strain
co n
to mee aints. T
aches
t,
str
appro
nd con , environmen
es a
v
objecti s (e.g., skills
will be
e
s) that these
c
logie
resour
techno ciated with
ew
tools, n Risks asso
essed
e addr
r
.
needed d how they a
an
factors
15

16. Summarizing Process Areas (ML3 example)
So, the evidence database will manage 25 process areas,
where 13 are specific for services or development, and 12
are common for both models, but they have to be evaluated
from both points of view.
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
SSD (addition)
CMM for Services
CMMI for Development
SAM (optional)
16

17. Quantifying costs reduction
Some numbers about experiences: Saved effort if your
organization goes to a multiple model SCAMPI instead of two
separated single model appraisals.
© 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
SAVED EFFORT AT MULTIPLE MODEL CMMI SCAMPI CLASS A
Saving
42,86%
34,62%
35,00%
Multiple Model
DEV SVC ML2
DEV SVC ML3
DEV ML3 SVC ML2
Single Model 1
DEV ML2
DEV ML3
DEV ML3
Additional effort if your
organization decides to
include CMMI SVC in the next
CMMI DEV SCAMPI
Single Model 2
SVC ML2
SVC ML3
SVC ML2
INCREASED EFFORT FROM SINGLE
TO MULTIPLE MODEL SCAMPI
Incr.
14,29%
30,77%
7,69%
Multiple Model
DEV SVC ML2
DEV SVC ML3
DEV ML3 SVC ML2
Single Model 1
DEV ML2
DEV ML3
DEV ML3
17

18. © 2013 CAELUM – All Rights reserved.
Ramiro Carballo Gutiérrez
Certified SCAMPI v.1.3 Lead Appraiser
( ID# 1201018-03 )
CMMI for Development
CMMI for Services
ramiro_carballo@caelum.es
Móv.: 639078817
www.linkedin.com/in/ramirocarballo
Caelum Information & Quality Technologies, S. L.
Párroco Eusebio Cuenca 50.
28045 Madrid
www.caelum.es
www.CalidaddelSoftware.com
Tlf.: 918312029
18