Register  |  Login

On this page you’ll find a high-level assessment (at the CMMI Process Area level) of some of the well-known development methods like Scrum, XP (eXtreme Programming) and RUP (Rational Unified Process). For ease of comparison the SmartMethod is also included.

 

This assessment can of course only be in very general terms and your specific implementation may well score very differently. Only a proper CMMI appraisal will tell you the specific practices which need attention either in your methodology and/ or in the application thereof by you and your team. However, this table does give a good idea of where the pain points typically are.

 

To score each of the methodologies, the following ranking system is used, with the associated point-score shown in brackets:

       “0”  not defined / not part of the method;

       “1”  not defined, but typically practised to some degree by individuals;

       “2”  partly defined, but not meeting all CMMI practices;

       “3” fully defined by the method (including templates).

 

Comments on this table are provided at the end of this page.

 

CMMI
Level

PA

Key Process Area

Scrum

XP

RUP

Smart
Method

2

 

Level 2 - Managed

 

 

 

 

2

REQM

Requirements Management

0

2

3

3

2

REQM

bi-directional traceability

0

0

0 / 2
ReqPro
tool

3
tool agnostic

2

PP

Project Planning

2

2

1

3

2

PMC

Project Monitoring and Control

3

2

1

3

2

SAM

Supplier Agreement Management

0

0

0

3

2

MA

Measurement and Analysis

1

2

0

3

2

PPQA

Process and Product Quality Assurance

3

1

3

3

2

CM

Configuration Management

2

2

0 / 3
ClearQuest tool ✓

3

2

 

Total “score” level 2

11

11

8-13

24

 

 

CMMI
Level

PA

Key Process Area

Scrum

XP

RUP

Smart
Method

3

 

Level 3 - Defined

 

 

 

 

3

RD

Requirements Development

2

2

3

3

3

TS

Technical Solution

1

0

3
UML

3

3

PI

Product Integration

2

1

0

3

3

VER

Verification

2

2

3

3

3

VAL

Validation

2

2

3

3

3 RSKM Risk Management 2 2 2 3
3 DAR Decision Analysis and Resolution 0 0 0 3
3 IPM Integrated Project Management 2 1 2 3

3

OPF

Organizational Process Focus

0

0

0

3

3

OPD

Organizational Process Definition

1

2

2

3

3

OT

Organizational Training

0

0

0

3

3

 

Total “score” level 3

14

12

18

33

 

General Comments

       The CMMI level 2 table splits the REQM PA into two parts: management (i.e. prioritization), and bi-directional traceability (i.e. linking of business to software requirements and tracing requirements to work products, i.e. doc, design, code, test, and vice versa). Bi-directional traceability is by far the hardest to achieve. In our experience no level 2 and hardly any level 3 project performs bi-directional traceability. However, it is essential to be able to manage change and not let your application slide into unmaintainable legacy, where every change introduces more bugs. In agile they often link code to test through the configuration management system like TFS. However, there is no linkage to atomic requirements locations in versioned "documents", or design-parts, unless you build it yourself. The process should define the specific practices of traceability but to implement that you need a requirements management tool which supports bi-directional traceability, such as ScopeTracker (Doors and CaliberRM can not trace within files, and can only trace files which are manually hyperlinked to requirements).

       Note that for Scrum and XP there are many published works, but there isn’t just one definitive standard body of work, like for the RUP or PRINCE2 which defines the artefacts. Scrum talks about the principles, but it has no defined set of artefacts (templates) to enforce any of it. Hence it scores a 2 as a max, as it is up to individuals to come up with their own templates and interpretation. A good method would do that for the individual. Thus this assessment is “our best stab average, biased towards giving the benefit of the doubt”. The maturity of these methods is as good as the published work you know / apply.

       Scrum, XP, and RUP only concern themselves with the project processes and do not address the Operational Process Focus (organizational processes) spanning across project delivery. Thus they can't deliver CMMi level 3.

       Since none of the Scrum, XP or RUP processes deliver CMMI level 2 maturity, it is unlikely that they will yield a stepped-up time / cost improvement. For Scrum and XP you'll see a significant improvement in client satisfaction, as they reduce scope to stay within the time/cost envelope. You’ll see some improvement for sure, but consistency across many projects will still be very much dependent on individuals rather than on the process. Thus your organization is still very much dependent on key individuals, and if they leave …

Scrum

       Scrum is excellent on Requirements gathering (RD, level 3) prioritizing (REQM) and reasonable on project monitoring and control, but it is not defined / supported by artefacts.

       Scrum, unlike XP, does try and address the upfront planning and estimation.

XP - eXtreme Programming:

       XP is notorious in that it refuses to estimate upfront. If you follow the method, at best you achieve an incomplete break down of deliverables, which is refined as you go. For practical reasons many practitioners have added their own work breakdown and planning techniques to plug the “project planning” process gap. Hence XP fails the project planning (PP) process, and in simple terms does not create the tracks to stay on.

       XP, like Scrum, is excellent on Requirements gathering (RD, level 3) and prioritization (REQM).

       XP’s design method is the “GML” (General Modeling Language) comprising of just a line and a box element, with no syntactical meaning to the diagramming technique. Thus XP provides little to no guidance for creating designs that can validate the requirements and interfaces, nor do they document alternatives, and hence the intent of the CMMi level 3 design process (TS) is lacking.

RUP

       The method/process is built around the IBM Rational development management tools like RequisitePro (requirements management), Functional Tester, Performance Tester, Rose (design tool). If you have all these tools and apply them as intended by the vendor, you would satisfy all aspects of Requirements management and fully operate at level 2 with parts of level 3 addressed as well (see also THE level 2 hurdle). However it comes at a heavy financial cost.

SmartMethod

       The SmartMethod implements all CMMI level 2 and 3 key process areas. The method informs you in detail which practices by process area to adopt, as explained in the Practices sections. Thereby for SmartMethod users, the CMMI is not abstract, but to the point and practical on what needs to happen to achieve the benefits (of reduced time/cost and time/cost variance).

       This is not a project management method, but it does spell out to project managers the specific project planning (PP), monitoring and control (PMC), sub-contractor agreement (SAM), and risk (RSKM) processes to adopt, in order to behave at level 3.

 

 

You’re thoughts on this assessment? Let’s improve it, give us feedback.

 

 mail to colleague

 

Rate:
Your Rating: 0.0   Average Rating: 0   Ratings: 0
Site Software v2.2.0, 26 Oct 2016