Case Study Implications

RES's use of the CoSQ approach was pioneering and, as such, they learned many lessons that others do not have to learn the hard way. CoSQ was primarily used as an after-the-fact measure of its SPI program's cost and benefits, rather than as a tool to guide its SPI program (which was the CMM). It is expected that other organizations using the CMM approach to SPI will want to do likewise. Therefore, a detailed analysis of the CMM versus CoSQ will be needed so that investment opportunities can be better focused on high-impact areas. This analysis should be focused on the impact of prevention activities in the 18 CMM key process areas on internally and externally induced rework.

RES encountered specific difficulties in the following areas:

• When and how the CoSQ data was gathered, analyzed, reported, and used

• How the model clashed with other models that were already in use

• The lack of an existing Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) with well-defined categories that correspond easily to CoSQ

• How the model was defined at the detailed levels

• How the model was implemented in the organization

• How CoSQ was used for root cause analysis

• How the model was used to stimulate SPI and quality improvements

These difficulties can be overcome with appropriate training and coaching.

RES's use of CoSQ occurred within the context of its contract-oriented systems business; therefore, the CoSQ approach was adapted to the specifics of that situation. A more general approach will likely need to be modified for use in other situations, with different business success parameters. These situations include:

• Standard product-oriented businesses

• Service delivery situations

• Technology-based start-ups