1 Integration of Process Initiatives And Assessments Common Process Framework Integration of Management System Standards and Initiatives (QMS/CMMI/Lean/PMBP) Integration of Assessments Wally Luther Mar Process Integration Overview

2 Objectives of Process Integration Encourage integration of disciplines Integrate models —Eliminate duplication of material —Remove conflicts between models Provide an efficient integrated approach for —Process improvement —Process assessment Improve on the models from our business perspective Engineer a solution to this complex problem —We have experience with complex things CMMI ISO 9001:2000 Lean Process Integration Process Integration PMBP

3 Process Initiative Integration Four separate initiatives are working together to create an integrated process environment —Simplified and integrated Pro system —Unified audits/assessments —Maximum reuse of process assets We are working to the CMMI today in this integration project CMMI internal goals Level Level 52005

4 Integrated Assessment Approach We’ve built all requirements into processes and command media Conceptually devised an integrated approach for single annual assessment for all affected initiatives/standards - Internal assessment process & other party validation being explored Process Integration Overview

5 CMMI Overview

6 Why CMMI? A model for Aerospace process improvement Provided underlying structure for reliable and consistent assessments The result of a national consensus A guide owned by the community —Standardized language and goals greatly facilitate identifying, importing, and adopting best practices from across the engineering community It make sense CMMI Transition Overview

7 Capability Maturity Model Integrated, CMMI To support process improvement, the CMMI provides Best practices Improvement paths Measurement standards CMMI Transition Overview

8 Industry Experience with SW CMM CMMI Transition Overview % 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% % reduction in effort per one level of change in process maturity Thousands of lines of code Upper 95% confidence limit Lower 95% confidence limit One level average change in process maturity Source: Adapted from Clark Source: Adapted from Diaz Value returned by the CMMI should easily dwarf that returned by the SW CMM because CMMI addresses more of the value stream

9 CMM Integration Project Sponsored by DoD and National Defense Industrial Association Project team includes representatives from —Government —Industry —SEI Coordinated by SEI CMMI Transition Overview

10 CMMI Concepts CMMI Transition Overview Process Areas, Specific Goals, Specific Practices How well things are done Levels, Generic Goals, Generic Practices Things to do

11 Gansler Memo Oct 1999 –Full compliance with SEI Capability Maturity Model Level 3 –Mitigation plans necessary –In as of Jan 2000 Source models will sunset in Dec 2003 Future –System/software/acquisition –Overall program perspective –CMMI requirement in RFPs already What is your competition doing? THE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PENTAGON, WASHINGTON, DC MEMORANDUM FOR COMPONENT ACQUISITION EXECUTIVES DIRECTOR OF BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION SUBJECT: Software Evaluations for ACAT I Programs It is DoD policy that software systems be designed and developed based upon software engineering principles. This includes the selection of contractors with the domain experience in developing comparable software systems, a successful past performance record, and a demonstrable mature software development capability and process. It also requires a software measurement process to plan and track the software program, and to assess and improve the development process and associated software product. Software development and performance is an integral component of advanced defense systems. Accordingly, it will be a technical requirement for contract that each contractor performing software development or upgrade(s) for use in an ACAT I program will undergo an evaluation, using either the tools developed by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI), or those approved by the DoD Components and the DUSD(S&T). At a minimum, full compliance with SEI Capability Maturity Model Level 3, or its equivalent level in an approved evaluation tool, is the Department's goal. However, if the prospective contractor does not meet full compliance, a risk mitigation plan and schedule must be prepared that will describe, in detail, actions that will be taken to remove deficiencies uncovered in the evaluation process and must be provided to the Program Manager for approval. The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Science & Technology) will define Level 3 equivalence for approved evaluation tools. The evaluation will be performed on the business unit proposed to perform the work. The reuse of existing evaluation results performed within a two-year period prior to the date of the government solicitation is encouraged. This policy is effective immediately and will be incorporated into the current DoD 5000 series rewrite. Y. S. Gansler 26 OCT 1999 External Drivers CMMI Transition Overview

12 Summary CMMI Transition Overview Organizational processes not aligned —Program management— Marketing —Systems engineering — Software engineering —Hardware engineering — Acquisition Separate process improvement efforts for different organizational processes —Compete for resources —Create stovepiped processes Resulting in sub-optimal enterprise processes!