CMMI (Capability Maturity Model Integration) (Category Management)
When I first started my career as an engineer, there were a lot of maturity models for software development processes, specifically CMMI. Today I decided to remember. history And the limits of applicability, because lately I've seen a great fascination with different models of maturity, for example. KMM or ACMM. I'm going to talk about it next time, and today let's talk about CMMI.
Original version of the CMM (Capability Maturity Model) SEI (Software Engineering Institute) Carnegie Mellon University in the late 1980s for the Department of Defense. The goal was to improve software development practices in this department. K 2000 In the year since, CMM has combined different maturity models and expanded to another word, Integration, to come out as the CMMI model and increase the limits of applicability.
The framework was built around the concepts of opportunity and maturity. Opportunities related to the organization’s ability to achieve business goals through well-constructed processes. Maturity reflected the concept of the evolution of processes in time from ad-hoc to feintyun and licking of built processes:)
The focus was on defining, implementing and continuously improving processes to ensure consistency and efficiency. The framework included goals and best practices to help move towards better processes. It had the following levels of maturity.
- InitialUnpredictable and reactive processes (conditionally reacting to the event)
- ManagedProcesses are planned and implemented with policies in mind
- DefinedProcesses are well described and standardized
- Quantitatively Managedprocesses are measurable and controlled using statistical methods
- OptimizingFocus on improving processes through innovation
Adherents of this approach rested on the advantages of the framework 1) Increased efficiency and productivity This was achieved through standardization and optimization, leading to workflow alignment and better resource allocation. 2) Quality improvement It was supposed to align processes to customer requirements to improve product quality and customer satisfaction. 3) Competitive advantage Achieving high levels of maturity set companies apart in the market, demonstrating their commitment to best practices. n (||Especially relevant for service companies that make projects to order||) 4) Scalability The framework allowed organizations to scale as they grow and develop some specifics.
And among the shortcomings highlighted 1) Complexity and cost CMMI implementation was complex, time-consuming, and expensive due to significant resources, training and documentation 2) Rigidity The model was inflexible and prevented the introduction of new practices and technology that appeared after its implementation. 3) Bureaucracy The model required a large number of documents, which increased the level of bureaucracy and reduced flexibility and creativity. (||No paper, you're a bug.||) 4) Lack of customizability This general model has not always been well-tended to any organization. (||For example, big tech companies that took off in the beginning. 2000- x||)This would limit such organizations if they tried to implement CMMI.
As a result, I saw the introduction of CMMI in the early 2000s in service companies. (||gallery||), who worked in the market of custom development, but had not heard of any big tech company that adopted this model. I think the reason is that the question, "What's the problem we're solving," this CMMI model doesn't provide any answer within the product company.
I think we need to focus on specific practices that solve specific problems. The process of writing RFC and fixing arch solutions in ADR
- Maintenance of teradar in the organization How to work with system reliability: observability, SLI/SLO/SLA, error budget
- and so on.
But I can't figure out if I'm going to hit the level. 5 CMMI except to please its internal bureaucrat.
#Processes #Management #Metrics #Leadership #Software