CMMI Case Study by Dan Fleck Reference: A CMMI Case Study: Process Engineering vs. Culture and Leadership by Jeffrey L. Dutton,Jacobs Sverdrup Reference: A CMMI Case Study: Process Engineering vs. Culture and Leadership by Jeffrey L. Dutton,Jacobs Sverdrup

Overview  Jacobs Sverdup’s Advanced Systems Group  400 employees  Seven states  Wide range of services and products to all 4 military branches and NASA  Range of sizes (40 people, 4 years to 2 people, 12 months)  Jacobs Sverdup’s Advanced Systems Group  400 employees  Seven states  Wide range of services and products to all 4 military branches and NASA  Range of sizes (40 people, 4 years to 2 people, 12 months)

Beginnings…  Chartered Software Engineering Process Group (SEPG)  SEPG trained field office Process Action Teams (PATs)  Idea: Buy-in would be easier with PATs in the field offices  Chartered Software Engineering Process Group (SEPG)  SEPG trained field office Process Action Teams (PATs)  Idea: Buy-in would be easier with PATs in the field offices

Reality  PAT teams had problems with buy-in, non-participation -- no one likes process  Attempts:  Tying perf appraisal to PAT participation  Positive feedback systems  Newsletters  Intense training  PAT teams had problems with buy-in, non-participation -- no one likes process  Attempts:  Tying perf appraisal to PAT participation  Positive feedback systems  Newsletters  Intense training

Plan 2: EPIC  SEPG reformed into Engineering Process Improvement Center (EPIC)  Created 2 person core team and got buy-in from field office leads (heads of field offices)  Adopted life-cycle framework from ISO/IEC  SEPG reformed into Engineering Process Improvement Center (EPIC)  Created 2 person core team and got buy-in from field office leads (heads of field offices)  Adopted life-cycle framework from ISO/IEC 12207

EPIC progress  Over two years defined six major work products:  An integrated engineering handbook for project managers, engineers, and management.  An engineering performance improvement program plan for the EPIC.  A process and product quality assurance plan for quality assurance.  A measurement and analysis plan for the entire organization.  A purchasing manual for contract managers and project managers.  A knowledge management plan.  Over two years defined six major work products:  An integrated engineering handbook for project managers, engineers, and management.  An engineering performance improvement program plan for the EPIC.  A process and product quality assurance plan for quality assurance.  A measurement and analysis plan for the entire organization.  A purchasing manual for contract managers and project managers.  A knowledge management plan.

New Mechanisms Adopted  A life cycle that is both flexible and recursive, allowing tailoring to support the needs of the project and the customer.  A repeatable tailoring approach that accommodates services, systems, and hardware and software development for small to large project sizes.  The use of principal managers and leaders in the organization to teach critical courses.  The early development of an automated measurement database.  The development (later than we wanted) of a distributed work environment to support process engineering and information sharing.  A life cycle that is both flexible and recursive, allowing tailoring to support the needs of the project and the customer.  A repeatable tailoring approach that accommodates services, systems, and hardware and software development for small to large project sizes.  The use of principal managers and leaders in the organization to teach critical courses.  The early development of an automated measurement database.  The development (later than we wanted) of a distributed work environment to support process engineering and information sharing.

Results?  External audits noted they still had buy-in and institutionalization lacking  Realized they needed more external audits because “organizational delusion” did not let them see the problems.  Refocused on knowledge management to fix these issues  Added pilot projects, all levels of review (low level to senior management), quality reviews, etc…  External audits noted they still had buy-in and institutionalization lacking  Realized they needed more external audits because “organizational delusion” did not let them see the problems.  Refocused on knowledge management to fix these issues  Added pilot projects, all levels of review (low level to senior management), quality reviews, etc…

Does it ever end?  Pilot projects showed numerous areas for improvements  Eventually organizational culture of change emerged helped by a strong leadership culture willing to change and everyone with a feeling of “People are our greatest asset” and “Growth is imperative”  Pilot projects showed numerous areas for improvements  Eventually organizational culture of change emerged helped by a strong leadership culture willing to change and everyone with a feeling of “People are our greatest asset” and “Growth is imperative”

Challenges and Lessons Learned  Leaders that got into leadership by providing their own “stovepipe processes”  Leaders asked to abandon tried and true processes  Needed people to trust EPIC to promote buy-in  Needed to respond quickly and positively to criticism and challenges to the process  Leaders that got into leadership by providing their own “stovepipe processes”  Leaders asked to abandon tried and true processes  Needed people to trust EPIC to promote buy-in  Needed to respond quickly and positively to criticism and challenges to the process

Leadership Didn’t Know  The CMMI really does change the way every part of the organization operates.  The costs associated with adoption of the CMMI are real and cannot be avoided.  Routine actions have to be conducted in accordance with the standard process, as well as corrective and near-crisis actions.  A CMMI process improvement effort is not just another project, where the work products are the most important output.  Some of the people you have worked with and trusted for years will resist the improvement effort for various well-intentioned reasons.  Assessments cannot be used to provide feedback and evaluate the performance of individual elements of the organization.  The CMMI process improvement effort must be carefully aligned with the goals of the organization to make it worthwhile.  The management and leadership style that has served to bring leaders this far in the organization now must be negotiated with the unseen authors of a complex model they are just beginning to appreciate.  The CMMI really does change the way every part of the organization operates.  The costs associated with adoption of the CMMI are real and cannot be avoided.  Routine actions have to be conducted in accordance with the standard process, as well as corrective and near-crisis actions.  A CMMI process improvement effort is not just another project, where the work products are the most important output.  Some of the people you have worked with and trusted for years will resist the improvement effort for various well-intentioned reasons.  Assessments cannot be used to provide feedback and evaluate the performance of individual elements of the organization.  The CMMI process improvement effort must be carefully aligned with the goals of the organization to make it worthwhile.  The management and leadership style that has served to bring leaders this far in the organization now must be negotiated with the unseen authors of a complex model they are just beginning to appreciate.

You should know  There will be more challenges then you expect  Some heros will leave the company  It will cost more than you expect  Leadership must believe in the process and be willing to weather the storm  Leaders must also know and trust their people who are implementing the program  There will be more challenges then you expect  Some heros will leave the company  It will cost more than you expect  Leadership must believe in the process and be willing to weather the storm  Leaders must also know and trust their people who are implementing the program

What do you get?  20% reduction in unit s/w costs - Lockheed Martin  15% decrease in defect find and fix cost - Lockheed Martin  Costs dropped 48% from a baseline prior to CMM as the achieved CMMI-3 - DB Systems GambH Estimation accuracy improved 72% on average in three technical areas - Siemens  Percentage of milestones met improved from approximately 50 percent to approximately 85 percent following organization focus on CMMI - General Motors  Many many more at: category.html  20% reduction in unit s/w costs - Lockheed Martin  15% decrease in defect find and fix cost - Lockheed Martin  Costs dropped 48% from a baseline prior to CMM as the achieved CMMI-3 - DB Systems GambH Estimation accuracy improved 72% on average in three technical areas - Siemens  Percentage of milestones met improved from approximately 50 percent to approximately 85 percent following organization focus on CMMI - General Motors  Many many more at: category.html