1. 1
A Model for Success
Applying the Capability Maturity Model Integrated to Continuous
Improvement Projects outside the Software Development Organization
15 August 2013
Dr. Robert L. Straitt, CEM, CDSM
Resource Efficiency Management Project
September 2010 through December 2012
Little Rock AFB, Arkansas
Project Overview:
Many continuous improvement methodologies are designed in a manner allowing ease of
tailoring across industries, as well as, both vertically and horizontally in a specific business
environment, such as development of software intensive systems. For example, the concepts of
quality for general use found in ISO 9000 and ISO 9001 have recently been migrated or tailored
to address the needs of continuous improvement and quality in the management of energy
efficiency efforts within industry. The SEI’s Capability Maturity Model Integration, which was
originally developed to support software development projects, is easily adaptable and tailorable
for a management framework to improve the energy utilization processes in a variety of
industrial environments.
Continuous improvement is not just a way of doing business it is a natural order of
business in any commercial enterprise. Market demands are always changing making new
demands on not only the
products/services an organization
produces, but also the processes by
which resources are acquired.
Understanding how an
organization gets better or more
competitive and cost efficient at
producing is critical to the
understanding, mapping, and
improving of its business and
production processes. In
recognition of this, the SEI has
developed three retailored versions
of the CMMI, one for development,

2. 2
a second for purchasing/acquisitions, and a third for service organizations. While each version
follows the model provided by the SEI and shown here, each of the versions are tailored to use
terminology that specifically applies the different business sectors. Thus, making the
improvement process easier to follow by the practitioners in various business units of an
organization. While allowing upper management to use a single framework with consistent and
aligned checkpoints or gates, to manage their continuous improvement process with.
As a Resource Efficiency Manager at Little Rock AFB, it was my job to find a way to
continually improve the processes of acquiring, providing energy services, and developing new
energy generation and application products to meet the overall objects of the various business
units that make up the operational and support organization at the facility. Using the lessons
learned, guidance, and maturity framework of the SEI/CMMI, and adapting that to the problem of
continually improving the energy profile, or delivery and usage processes, I was able to make
Little Rock AFB an award winning organization. Some of the goals that were met during this
initiative using a tailored CMMI methodology approach include:
 Applied CMMI methods and guidance to the engineering and program management
approach for the implementation of resource management/conservation activities for
Little Rock AFB, with an annual energy budget in excess of more than $8 million.
 Develop an award winning resource efficient program and individual project initiatives
for over $35 million in resource conservation and sustainability projects, with estimated
savings in excess of $50 million.
 Implemented a Product- Life-Cycle-Costing methodology, for project design, development,
and implementation management activities.
 Developed and implemented a standardize project management and reporting approach,
that integrated data from several engineering, analysis and budgetary data
bases/automated tools into a streamlined information report for senior and executive
management decision making.
 Developed a continuous improvement based Energy Management Plan Template for use
by organizations.
Measuring:
When beginning any continuous improvement project one of the most critical activities to
be implemented, is an analysis or measure of where the organization is on the maturity scale.
These very early and often informal measurements are necessary to help the consult understand
how the varying levels of management maturity are distributed around the organization.
Because presentation of these measures is often limited to upper management to support
planning objectives, these early measurements are often presented in a static format, while later
measurement reporting requires a more interactive and automated mechanism to provide up to
date information at a usable level of abstraction for various managers and decision makers.

3. 3
Metrics collected and reported on this project were gathered from a variety of data sets
including spreadsheets, enterprise wide databases, work order databases, and various financial
datasets and analysis tools. Data included, cost data, requirements information, energy usage
information, project management data, and technical design data. Reporting information
included abstraction levels at the practitioner, manager, senior manager, and executive
management levels on the facility. Additionally the information had to be passed up to higher
authorities for budget allocation and approval, as well as, technical assessment and
implementation authorization.
Previously each project initiative was handled in stove-pipe fashion with all data
collection and analysis handled manually and then inputted into static reports and presentations
for submission, approval, and archival. The goal of the metrics and measurement reporting
initiative was to develop an easy to maintain and utilized automated/interactive tool that could
be used to collect, store, normalize, and report data as useful information in a tabular and
graphic formats, for use by key decision makers. The Microsoft Office toolset was selected
because it was already available, was familiar to the user community, and it allowed for rapid
prototyping and implementation by the user community. A dashboard was developed later in
the project for implementation in a Microsoft .net framework implementation.
The following screen shots show some of the highlights of the metrics and reporting tool
developed for use on this project:
Efficiency Improvement Program Metrics
Energy Program Management
Metrics
Energy program metrics give an
overall view of performance of
the program on at the enterprise
level.

4. 4
Energy Program Management
Metrics
Information presented at various
levels of abstraction as necessary
to meet the needs of managers
and decision makers.
Facility Performance Metrics
Facility performance metrics
provide enterprise level and
facility managers a quick look at
how individual facilities meeting
performance goals.
Achievement levels for both
overall performance and
individual performance areas
displayed in a consistent and
interactive format.

5. 5
Facility Comparison Metrics
Facility comparison metrics
provide enterprise level and
facility managers a method of
comparing efficiency
performance and improvement
levels between two facilities.
Data is normalized to allow
facility managers to compare
their improvement performance
against other facilities.
Energy Project Metrics
Energy project metrics collate and normalize performance data from various raw data sets into
a standard tabular format for engineering analysis, life-cycle-costing, and project
development/approval.

6. 6
Project Metrics Rollup
Individual project metrics normalized and rolled up in easy to follow, standardized format for
status reporting and to drive program performance metrics from a common set of raw data
points. Current project status parameters are provided to support earned value management.
Quality Metrics
Quality data on various processes of the program such as data collection processes is gathered
and presented to help establish program reliability and availability confidence levels.

7. 7
Project Planning:
Effective and traceable project planning is critical to program success. Project
performance is directly linked to the effectiveness of the planning process. One of the most
important aspects of that process is the development of a written management plan that defines
not just a proposed schedule, as is often thought of as a plan, but the specifics of what is to be
accomplished. A project plan defines and manages expectations of all stakeholders by
documenting in detail the objects and methods of accomplishing those objects.
Let us look at how a classical CMMI based project plan for a continuous process
improvement initiative can be adapted to non-software development projects, such as a program
for continuous improvement of energy efficiency activities.

8. 8
When developing a workable management plan the concepts of phases, with entrance and
exit criteria associated to these phases is an essential to implementation of a successful program.
When looking at continuous improvement activities in an energy efficiency initiative, the
activities should be group so that current work becomes a part of or supports future efficiency
enhancements. For example in the Emery and Resource Efficiency Plan highlighted in this
report, improvement activities are sequenced to address current infrastructure improvements
and then future infrastructure improvements, while integration of new technologies like
renewables is addressed and the management of costs are integrated in to the process across the
project’s life-cycle phases.
As in any continuous improvement initiative, improvement activities accomplished today
have to lead into future improvements that may not be affordable now, or require prerequisite
activities to be accomplished prior to their subsequent initiation. Managing costs is an activity
that involves the total life cycle of the proposed improvement, from concept, to capital outlay,
future improvements integration, to final retirement of the improvement.
A continuous improvement management plan should include an introduction which gives
enough background about the organization and products/services provided to set a backdrop for

9. 9
the improvement process to be mapped against. Planners and implementers will use the
information in this section to help produce project goals and implementation strategies that fit
the internal organization cultural makeup and meet the external customer expectations for
products/services.
Each improvement activity description in any continuous improvement management plan
should be described in five parts, Activity Description, Objective, Predecessors, Products, and
Success Criteria. In the below example we will demonstrate how a CMMI based improvement
activity can be written to meet the needs of an energy efficiency improvement project.
Activity Description:
The Activity Description should define the end purpose of the activity and
terminology that is specific to and understandable by knowledgeable practitioners in the
field of technology implemented. For example, if working with software, the terminology
would be consistent with the operating systems, programing languages, applications, and
process of that software suite. If you are looking at production, product design, or in
these case energy efficiency improvements the terminology should be easily

10. 10
understandable by someone familiar with energy management and energy efficiency
analysis. Example Description:
A building assessment is a process by which a profile of the buildings energy
needs, usage, and avoidable losses are identified, documented, and analyzed for potential
improvements. Each assessment will investigate the following at a minimum:
 Building Envelope – Inspect and analyze doors, windows, roofing, insulation, siding
 HVAC Systems – Age, ductwork, controls, power consumption, fresh airflow, system
insulation
 Plumbing and Water Systems – Water heaters/instant on heaters, leaks/drips, non-
insulated water pipes, fixtures
 Interior/Exterior Lighting – Proper luminance levels and fixture placement, controls
(convert manual to motion sensing), solar powered outside lighting, energy-efficient
fixtures (inductive, florescent, etc).
Activity Objective:
The Activity Object describes the specific objective of the tasks that are going to be
performed in the activity, or what it is that is to be accomplished. Example Objective:
To assess on average one building per week and enter energy related
information into the building assessment spreadsheet for that building.
Activity Predecessors:
The Activity Predecessors are those events that must have occurred or artifacts
from previous activities that must be in place before this activity can be started. The
predecessors are used as inputs into the activity or are consumed within the activity to
create the output of the activity. Example Predecessor:
List of buildings to conduct assessments on created by REM and Service Shop
Technicians.
Activity Products:
The Activity Products are the artifacts of the process followed during the activity.
These may be a report, collection of data, or other verification that the procedures of the
activity were completed. Example Products:
 A completed building energy assessment worksheet

11. 11
 Pictures of the facility and major energy consuming devises (HVAC, Lights,
Computers, etc.)
 Recommendations for energy projects.
Activity Success Criteria:
The Activity Success Criteria describes the pass conditions that must met when the
activity is completed. If the activity is to be considered a success, all of these conditions
must have been fully and successfully met as described. Activity Success Criteria and
Activity Objectives are key elements of Earned Value Management planning and tracking.
Example Success Criteria:
Twelve Energy (NRG) projects will have been entered in ACES, validated by
AMC, and submitted to AFCESA for consideration of funding.
Program Schedule:
The program schedule, which is usually most effectively displayed in Gantt Chart format,
provides a one for one checklist between each planned program activity and specific start and
stop dates of that activity. The program schedule provides another critical input to the Earned
Value Management process. The schedule provides insight into if the remaining activities have
enough calendar time to include all the work hours needed to be performed for those activities.
It also readily shows if activity starts and stops are being bunched up or stacked instead of being
evenly distributed throughout the project.

12. 12
Conclusion:
While the CMM/CMMI was originally developed to support effective management of
software development projects, much of the model was adapted from Total Quality Management
and Earn Value Management principles and methods championed by notable leaders in quality
management as Dr. W. Edward Deming, and Dr. Joseph M. Juran for manufacturing and services
industries. A thorough understanding of the underlying theory of organizational maturity, rather
than just the model’s definitions in structure allows for the adaptation of the model to most any
management situation.
During this project, CMMI based management methods and measurement tools were
adopted to support the continuous improvement activities of an enterprise wide energy
efficiency initiative. Many of the tools, processes, and planning/management documents were
tailored from previous software intensive system development/maintenance continuous
improvement projects, where they had successfully been used repeatedly to advance
organizations up the CMM maturity scale.
While today we have various versions of the CMMI that have had their terminology
tailored to various business functions found in many larger software organizations, at one time

13. 13
there was originally only a single version of the CMM model. The role of the CMM implementer
(unlike a quality-control-like function of the CMM Assessor (Auditor) who verifies
implementation), is to work hand in hand with both the management and the various functional
practitioners to map the organization and CMM framework to each other. While Assessor has to
have almost a photographic memorization of the terminology and contents of the practice areas
in order to quickly accomplish, a CMMI Assessment of organizational artifacts in a very limited
time. An implementer’s (coach/mentor) focus is on institutionalization or actually showing
managers and practitioners how and why each of the Key Process Area (KPA) activities are in
some way being done within their organization under some single or group of tasks. Once the
specific organizational tasks corresponding to the various CMM KPAs can be identified then the
process of adopting a continuous improvement mindset to using and reviewing them has to be
instilled in all members of the organization’s staff.
Because many CMM KPA activities are often, being performed informally, grouped
together, or called by different terms, organization staff members feel that they cannot be
accomplished by their organization or simply do not apply to their organization. This is one of
the biggest obstacles to an organization succeeding at implementing the CMMI. Numerous
successes at showing managers and practitioners how all the KPAs are useful to them in their
software organization, provides the insight and knowledge necessary for an implementation
expert to transition the CMM framework to virtually any business or production environment.
Because of the very nature of how energy is used in any organization, energy use practices lend
themselves to a similar feedback loop as software development and maintenance. Once the
CMMI terminology can be normalized to that of the energy efficiency improvement practice, the
CMMI framework provides a practical and highly efficient continuous improvement model for
saving energy, reducing operating costs, and improving the working environment.
Improving the economic performance of an organization is the ultimate goal of any
continuous improvement effort and energy/resource efficiency management must add to the
increased economic performance levels of the organization to be a successful implementation.
By using the years of experience in implementing the various methods and philosophy’s of
quality management practices intrinsically comprised within the CMMI, energy/resource
efficiency management can be a highly predictable, verifiable, and repeatable practice area
within any business organization.