Moving from Maturity Level 1 to Level 2

Overview

This chapter is designed to help the reader understand the basic tenets of Maturity Level 2 in the staged representation of the CMMI . However, because this chapter consists of summaries of the process areas, anyone wishing to get a better idea of the model ” no matter which representation is to be used ” can benefit from this chapter. Once again, this is not an attempt to teach the CMMI; we simply offer a condensed version of the various areas and key points to consider.

New concepts are introduced in Level 2 in CMMI. They include:

• Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD)

• Supplier Management

One Concept ” Measurement and Analysis ” has a greatly expanded role and is discussed later in this chapter.

IPPD, while introduced in Supplier Agreement Management at Maturity Level 2, is more rigorously addressed in Level 3, and will be explained in Chapter 6. Suffice it to say that IPPD is about forming teams that include subject matter experts from all areas needed to produce the product for the customer.

Supplier Agreement Management (SAM) has to do with ensuring that any organization or business external to the actual project is selected and monitored appropriately. This external source (supplier) may be responsible for delivering either a product or a service, and may be involved in the design, development, maintenance, manufacture, modification, upgrade, or supply of any of the items required to produce the product. This supplier has an agreement (contract) with the acquiring body, and it is this agreement that is used to effectively manage the effort provided by the suppler. This agreement must be properly defined, documented, used, monitored , and measured. Supplier Agreement Management replaced Software Subcontract Management (SSM) in the CMM for Software. SSM was the key process area most often tailored out of assessments and software process improvement activities because if there were no subcontractors used, then this area did not apply. SAM has been broadened somewhat, and probably will apply much more often, as almost everyone building an entire system/product using the CMMI will have some sort of outside assistance requiring contracts. Including SAM in the CMMI also makes a correlation to the Software Acquisition Capability Maturity Model (SA-CMM) more plausible. Although both SAM and the Software Acquisition Model discuss suppliers, vendors , procurements, and acquisition roles, more information from a different perspective may be found in the Acquisition Model.

When comparing the CMM for Software to the CMMI, what has been left out? There are no longer Project Management/Manager reviews as part of the Verifying Implementation Common Feature. The reviews focus on senior management. Few groups are included (e.g., no mention of the Software Quality Assurance group ). Also as part of Verifying Implementation, there are no specific references or requirements for a Quality Assurance review.