Agile development methods and CMMI – Factors that Affect Perception - MISUSE - Part 2

Whether analyzing the CMM or CMMI, there is one thing shared by both works that makes them unique—they are models, not standards, for improving product quality and process performance.

However, for nearly two decades, the software industry has experienced the result of people misusing appraisal ratings as entry criteria, confusing appraisal ratings for measures of business performance,and misapplying a model as a standard in an environment in which products are created
to meet contractual requirements.

Used in this way, CMM and CMMI best practices were misinterpreted and misused. It is not an exaggeration to say that any approach to improve an organization’s achievement of business objectives in such an environment would have difficulty overcoming an emphasis on RFP requirements
and keen competition for multi-year contracts.

Does this situation mean that CMMI is wrong for software? Not in the least. It simply illuminates the following reasons why some perceive CMMI to be incompatible with

Agile ideals:

• The context from which the CMM and CMMI originated was specific to a particular customer base having unique challenges and characteristics of high risk and low trust.
  
  
• The CMM and CMMI were a new paradigm introduced into a large (and dominant) industry where paradigms, including the attitudes and beliefs associated with them, were in place for many years (e.g., command and control).
  
  
• Agile ideals developed as a backlash against the inefficient software development patterns that arose in this industry.
  

These points describe the context in which the CMM and CMMI were developed. This context enables us to understand some of the characteristics of the CMM and CMMI and how they have been used over the past two decades. While the language of CMMI, admittedly, may retain some of the flavor and phrasing of this context, each release of a CMMI model grows further away from these roots to embrace a richer and more dynamic set of contexts (Users of older model versions may not fully make the transition as new versions are released, and older beliefs and values may persist. Further, while CMMI and SCAMPI materials continue to evolve, it is simply not possible
to bring all users rapidly forward to the newer versions, government edicts and SEI encouragement notwithstanding.) Users of older model versions may not fully make the transition as new versions are released, and older beliefs and values may persist. Further, while CMMI and SCAMPI materials continue to evolve, it is simply not possible to bring all users rapidly forward to the newer versions, government edicts and SEI encouragement notwithstanding.

Further, this context is not the sole element determining how CMMI should be used, when and where it can be used, or what defines whether CMMI is being properly used. Nor for that matter, does this context determine its applicability in other contexts. The challenge is for the broader community to identify the practices and methods (or practice implementations) that enable organizational maturity in more dynamic contexts (e.g., internet commerce, social networking, and games development). An increasing subset of both CMMI and Agile method users are trying to do just that.