Transcript Business Value of CMMI Level 5

Is CMMI High
Maturity Worth the
Investment?
Southern California SPIN
2 February 2007
Rick Hefner, Ph.D.
Director, Process Management
Northrop Grumman Corporation
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Background
 Until recently, Level 3 was considered the industry standard
 Now, several organizations have achieved high maturity and are
touting its benefits
 To others, high maturity (Levels 4 & 5) is perceived as expensive
and of little benefit
Do high maturity processes cost more?
Is Level 4 and 5 worth the effort?
2
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
CMMI Levels
Improving, addressing
common causes of variation
Quantitatively managed,
eliminating special causes of variation
3
Level
Process Areas
5 Optimizing
Causal Analysis and Resolution
Organizational Innovation and Deployment
4 Quantitatively Quantitative Project Management
Organizational Process Performance
Managed
Work proactively managed,
organizational standard processes
3 Defined
Work planned and tracked
(reactively managed)
2 Managed
Work performed,
but in an ad hoc fashion
Requirements Development
Technical Solution
Product Integration
Verification
Validation
Organizational Process Focus
Organizational Process Definition
Organizational Training
Risk Management
Integrated Project Management (for IPPD*)
Integrated Teaming*
Integrated Supplier Management**
Decision Analysis and Resolution
Organizational Environment for Integration*
Requirements Management
Project Planning
Project Monitoring and Control
Supplier Agreement Management
Measurement and Analysis
Process and Product Quality Assurance
Configuration Management
1 Performed
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
The Project Manager’s Dilemma at Level 3
I want to use the organization’s
standard process, but…
… Does it’s performance and quality
meet my customer’s expectations?
… If not, how should I tailor the
process?
4
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
CMMI Level 4
 Organizational Process Performance
 Establishes a quantitative understanding of the performance of the
organization’s set of standard processes
 Provides process performance data, baselines, and models to quantitatively
manage the organization’s projects
measurement
repository
organizational
standard process
organizational
performance data
& models
tailoring
project performance
5
project’s defined
process
customer and project
objectives
 Quantitative Project Management
 Quantitatively manage the project’s defined process to achieve the project’s
established quality and process-performance
objectives.
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Exercise –
What is Quantitative Management?
 Suppose your project
conducted several peer
reviews of similar code, and
analyzed the results
 Mean = 7.8 defects/KSLOC
 +3σ = 11.60 defects/KSLOC
 -3σ = 4.001
defects/KSLOC
I Chart for Defects
 What would you expect
the next peer review to
produce in terms of
defects/ KSLOC?
 What would you think if
a review resulted in 10
defects/KSLOC?
12
UCL=11.60
 3 defects/KSLOC?
Individual Value
11
10
9
8
Mean=7.8
7
6
5
4
LCL=4.001
 How would this be useful
to your project/
organization?
 Was the review effective?
 Was the process
different?
 Is the product different?
3
0
5
10
15
Observation Number
6
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Exercise –
What is Required for Quantitative Management?
 What is needed to develop the
statistical characterization of
a process?
I Chart for Defects
12
UCL=11.60
Individual Value
11
10
9
8
Mean=7.8
7
6
5
4
LCL=4.001
 The process has to be
stable (predictable)
 Process must be
consistently performed
 Complex processes may
need to be stratified
(separated into simpler
processes)
 There has to be enough
data points to statistically
characterize the process
 Processes must occur
frequently within a similar
context (project or
organization)
3
0
5
10
15
Observation Number
7
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Typical Choices in Industry
 Most customers care about:
 Delivered defects
 Cost and schedule
Defect Detection Profile
180.00
160.00
140.00
120.00
Defects/KSLOC
 So organizations try to
predict:
 Defects found throughout
the lifecycle
 Effectiveness of peer
reviews, testing
 Cost achieved/actual
(Cost Performance Index –
CPI)
 Schedule achieved/actual
(Schedule Performance
Index – SPI)
100.00
All Projects
New Process
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
Req'mts
Design
Code
Unit Test
Integrate
Sys Test
Del 90 Days
Phase
Process performance
• Process measures (e.g., effectiveness, efficiency, speed)
• Product measures (e.g., quality, defect density).
8
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
What Can a Level 4 Project/Organization Do?
 Determine whether processes are behaving consistently or have stable
trends (i.e., are predictable)
 Identify processes where the performance is within natural bounds that
are consistent across process implementation teams
 Establish criteria for identifying whether a process or process element
should be statistically managed, and determine pertinent measures and
analytic techniques to be used in such management
 Identify processes that show unusual (e.g., sporadic or unpredictable)
behavior
 Identify any aspects of the processes that can be improved in the
organization's set of standard processes
 Identify the implementation of a process which performs best
9
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
What Drives the Effectiveness of Level 4?
• Comparable projects?
• Enough measures to
stratify/analyze the
data?
measurement
repository
• How detailed are the
standard processes?
• What tailoring is
allowed?
organizational
standard process
• Enough data points?
• How insightful/useful
are the baselines and
models?
organizational
performance data
& models
tailoring
project performance
• Stable processes?
• Clean data?
10
project’s defined
process
• How much tailoring?
• Does the project follow
its process?
customer and project
objectives
• Does the organization’s
process fit the
objectives?
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
What Does Level 5 Add to the Organization?
Level 5
Organizational Innovation &
Deployment
 Goals are quantitative (e.g., reduce
variation by X%, reduce mean by Y%)
 Incremental improvements –
eliminate special causes of variation
 Innovative improvements - cause a
major shift in process capability
 Potential improvements are analyzed
to estimate costs and impacts
(benefits)
Level 3
Organizational Process Focus
 Improvements are piloted to ensure
success
 Improvements are measured in terms
of variation and mean
 Goals are qualitative (e.g., get better)
 The effects of the improvements are
not estimated or measured
11
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Peer Reviews – Improving the Process
 Reduce the variation
 Train people on the process
 Create procedures/checklists
 Strengthen process audits
 Increase the effectiveness
(increase the mean)




12
Train people
Create checklists
Reduce waste and re-work
Replicate best practices from
other projects
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
What Does Level 5 Add to the Project?
 Causal Analysis & Resolution
 Identify and analyze causes of defects and other problems
 Take specific actions to remove the causes
 The project can then take actions to prevent the occurrence of
those types of defects and problems in the future
 Many projects implement Causal Analysis & Resolution at Level 4
 Identify and eliminate special cause variations to stabilize the
process
13
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
How Does Level 4 & 5 Benefit the Customer?
 Organizational
process performance
 More accurate estimates
 Quantitative project
management
 Problem behaviors are
recognized faster, enabling
quicker resolution
 Organizational
innovation and
deployment
 The project benefits from
improvements found and
proven on other projects
 Causal analysis
 The project fixes the source
of defects to prevent future
defects
Level 5 reduces costs and improves quality (so we implement it on all projects)
14
Reference: How Does High Maturity Benefit the Customer?,
R. Hefner, Systems & Software Technology Conference, 2005
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Two Complementary Approaches
to Process Improvement
Data-Driven (e.g., Lean Six Sigma)
Model-Driven (e.g., CMM, CMMI)
 Clarify what your customer
wants (Voice of Customer)
 Critical to Quality (CTQs)
 Determine the industry best
practice
 Benchmarking, models
 Determine what your processes
can do (Voice of Process)
 Statistical Process Control
 Compare your current practices
to the model
 Appraisal, education
 Identify and prioritize
improvement opportunities
 Causal analysis of data
 Identify and prioritize
improvement opportunities
 Implementation
 Institutionalization
 Determine where your
customers/competitors are
going (Voice of Business)
 Design for Six Sigma
15
 Look for ways to optimize the
processes
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Lean Six Sigma Provides the Needed Tools
to Implement CMMI High Maturity
Number of Noncompliances
Process knowledge
Process variation
12
UCL
Process performance
16
Actual
14
Expected
8
12
95% limits
_
X
4
8
4
2
Projects Audited in First Quarter
UCL 1
UCL 2
0
1
2
3
4
Stabilize
16
Register
allocation
defect
Incorrect processor
register usage
6
0
Poor
documentation
Lack of
processor
knowledge
10
2
Can’t keep track
Pass 1
architecture
Can’t isolate
10
6
Side effects of
register usage
5
6
7
7C 8B 8B 8C 8D 8F 20
21
22
LCL 2
23
LCL 1
Improve & Control
Predict
Level 4
Level 5
 Understand project’s process
capabilities
based on process performance
baselines
 Control process variation
(remove “assignable causes”)
 Predict results using process
performance models
 Manage to achieve goals
 Base improvement goals on
future business needs
 Eliminate problem and defect
causes (“common causes”)
 Select, predict, and measure
improvements to change the
process performance baselines shift the mean; tighten the variance
 Manage change
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Barriers and Challenges
 Engineering process measurements are often difficult to analyze
 Inherent process variations when human creativity is involved
 Dirty (or no) data
 Vague measurement definitions, human recording errors
 Infrequent measurements
 Non-normal data
 Need for stratification/aggregation
 Must demonstrate the value of quantitative data to managers
 Management style - reactive vs. proactive vs. quantitative
 Less value in a chaotic environment
 Must involve customers
17
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Northrop Grumman
Launch Workshop Strategy
Prerequisite
2 week Six
Sigma Green
Belt training
Launch 0
Executive
Overview
Launch 1
Intro to
Quantitative
Management
• Finalize project
goals
• Obtain
measurement
data for the
subprocesses the
project will put
under SPC
analysis
• Become familiar
with Northrop
Grumman Mission
Systems QPM
process
• Definition of
related six sigma
project(s)
• Incorporate and
measure progress
against the Level
4/5 plan tasks
18
Launch 2
Statistical
Process
Control
• Collect relevant
project historical
data, review it and
perform initial
“clean up”
• Collect data from
project
subprocesses
and put on SPC
charts
• Complete project
profile
• Review business
issues for clarity
Launch 3
Quantitative
Monitoring &
Management
Launch 4
CMMI Level 5
(OID &CAR)
• Finish building
models
• Develop project
CAR plan
• Begin tracking to
models
• Start project CAR
activities
• Draft Quantitative
Measurement
Plan
• Submit
improvements to
support OID
(when applicable)
• Draft QPM
evidence
• Measure progress
against the Level
4/5 plan tasks
• Measure progress
against the Level
4/5 plan tasks
• Identify
Quantitative
Measurement
Plan data
• Measure progress
against the Level
4/5 plan tasks
STM 925.1-Exec,
01, 05-05-04
Copyright Rev
2005 Northrop
Grumman Corporation
Lessons Learned (1 of 2)
Based on over 35 Northrop Grumman CMMI Level 5 organizations
1) Level 3 metrics, measurement processes, and goal setting are
generally inadequate for Levels 4 and 5
 Better definitions of the measures
 Lower level metrics of lower level subprocesses
 Stratifying the data properly
2) When operating at Level 3, it is difficult to predict the
measurement improvements needed
 Trying to understand and stabilize the key subprocesses will
naturally drive you to the right metrics
3) CMMI and Six Sigma compliment each other
 CMMI can yield behaviors without benefit
 Six Sigma improvements based solely on data may miss
innovative improvements (assumes a local optimum)
4) Six Sigma is an enabler for higher maturity
 Focus on data, measurement systems, process improvement
 Tying improvements to business goals
 Tools and methods support the Level 4/5 analysis tasks
19
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
Lessons Learned (2 of 2)
5) Projects have different quality and process performance needs,
and should select different subprocesses to quantitatively
manage
 This will also slow adoption, and complicate the organizational
baselines and models
6) Training the staff as Six Sigma Green Belts has resulted in a
change of language and culture
 Voice of Customer, data-driven decisions, causal analysis, etc.
 Better to use the tools in everyday work than to adopt the
“religion”
7) The real ROI comes in institutionalizing local improvements
across the wider organization
 CMMI establishes the needed mechanisms
Having all the tools at Level 5 gives you the insight to manage each
project the way the customer needs it to be managed
20
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation
References
2006 CMMI Conference
 “Using ‘Voice of Customer’ Tools to Advance
Organizational Innovation and Deployment”, Don
Corpron
 “Making OID Effective,” Diane Mizukami
 “Statistical Control of System and Software Design
Activities, “ Dr. Richard Welch and Ms. April King
 “Business Value of CMMI Level 5,” Gene Miluk,
Lynn Penn, Rick Hefner and Rushby Craig
Other Sources
 “Squeezing Variation for Profit”, Don Corpron, CMMI
Technology Conference and User Group, 2005
 “How Does High Maturity Benefit the Customer?,”
Rick Hefner, Systems & Software Technology
Conference, 2005
 “Using a Process Database to Facilitate Transition
to Level 4”, Rick Hefner, International Conference
on Applications of Software Measurement, 2002
 “Business Value and Customer Benefits Derived
from High Maturity”, Alan Pflugrad, CMMI
Technology Conference and User Group, 2002
 http://www.isixsigma.com
 High Maturity with Statistics, SEI course
21
CMMI Implementation:
Embarking on High
Maturity Practices,
Shivraj Kanungo, Asha
Goyal
Measuring the
Software Process,
William A. Florac, Anita
D. Carleton
Metrics and Models in
Software Quality
Engineering, Stephen
H. Kan
Understanding
Variation: The Key to
Managing Chaos,
Donald J. Wheeler
Copyright 2005 Northrop Grumman Corporation