This presentation is on two well known case studies of CMMI implementation in the industry.

1. An analysis of two case studies to understand the process improvement Presented by Priyaashree Rakesh Vishaal Indranil Rohit Prasad Surya CMMI

2. Introduction The CMMI is a framework for business process improvement It is NOT an engineering development standard or a development life cycle There are currently three "flavours" of CMMI called constellations. -CMMI for Development - 22 Process Areas. -CMMI for Acquisition - 21 Process Areas. -CMMI for Services - 24 Process Areas. The three constellations share 16 "core" process areas. Process Areas are organized in two main ways, called "Representations“. Staged Continuous Maturity Level and Capability Level

3. Brief History of CMMI In the 1980s a Standish Group study found that over 30% of all large software projects failed to be delivered, and, of the remaining, nearly 80% failed to come in on time and budget To beat these odds, and to lower the overall cost of buying software, the Department of Defense funded the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon University to find ways to help defense contractors build software more economically. Result became the Capability Maturity Model for software, or CMM. Today, the CMM/CMMI are the de facto standard for software management throughout the Federal government and is internationally recognized as a very powerful business tool and competitive differentiator.

4. CMMI : few structural concepts The SEI identified 25 total process areas and put them into the CMMI. There are two ways to apply the 25 processes depending on which approach suits the development shop best. They can choose to apply pre-determined processes in a specific sequence to achieve "maturity" in managing development, or, they can choose the processes most important to their business and apply the necessary rigor to achieve a "capability" for managing development. The "maturity" scale has 5 levels And, the "capability" scale has 6 levels the "maturity" levels are pre-defined, the approach is called "staged." The "capability" approach is called "continuous" because the performance of the processes are tied to business objectives

5. Case Study 1 GENERAL MOTORS Implementation of CMMI for acquisition

6. Objective and Solution BUSINESS CHALLENGES: GM has been acquiring and not developing IT-solutions for decades. It had to evolve constantly with changing business need. Implementation of the model required structural change and following global standard practices. CMMI SOLUTION: GM recognized that it must excel in Requirements ,architecture and Project management to be a successful acquirer and customer.

7. Implementation Requirements: Acquirer ownership of requirement is essential and acquirer must be skilled in requirement engineering Action: established requirement team and requirement prototyping is done Architecture: Architectural philosophy varies within supplier base Action: Enterprise level system engineering team built and cross area/functional architecture planning meeting held Project management: better relationship with customers was necessary for the acquisition PM Action: integrated GM and supplier project plan, Standard peer and acceptance review was done. BENEFIT: General motors was the first commercial enterprise to be appraised utilizing CMMI- ACQ The best practices encompassed in the CMMI-ACQ drove quality throughout the IT acquisition model of GM

8. Case Study 2 Implementation by a leading telecom giant to improve the quality of the entire software development process

10. Absence of formal estimation processes

11. Lack of proper documentation

12. No rationale for estimates - incorrect estimations

13. Change in project Plans during project

14. High degree of post release defects handled by the support team – No feedback to Dev team

15. Review process was inadequate enough to analyze the review data captured

16. Any process addition or process improvement initiative was looked upon as a cost to the product lifecycle

18. Process action teams - Address these gaps

19. Looked at individual KPAs and tried to address the gaps in the same

20. Requirement management measures and change management process were defined for the key projects

21. In project planning, new project management roles were defined.

22. A methodology for tracking effort was laid down and a tool was created and implemented to track efforts

23. A new estimation methodology was drafted.

24. Quality planning was also implemented along with core project metrics which were then regularly reviewed.

25. A new approach to configuration management procedure was proposed along with necessary templates.

27. The client was assessed at CMMI Level 2 maturity after implementing and practicing the recommended process changes.