Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Different Maturity Approaches Laatuseniorien kokous, 15.4.2009 Risto Nevalainen.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Different Maturity Approaches Laatuseniorien kokous, 15.4.2009 Risto Nevalainen."— Presentation transcript:

1 Different Maturity Approaches Laatuseniorien kokous, 15.4.2009 Risto Nevalainen

2 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 2  Something about history of maturity  Current models (CMMI, SPICE)  Idea of ”high maturity”  ISO and other current activities  Discussion Topics

3 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 3 Starting point…

4 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 4 Me and You

5 Yksi esimerkki: sairas vs terve organisaatio (Jussi Moisio) – miten satavuotiaista organisaatioista voisi oppia?

6 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 6 The Concept of Maturity – as used commonly  Typically an organisational characteristic of learning and improvement  Can be modeled as maturity levels (?)  Ordinal scale (?)  De Facto models CMM and Staged CMMI have 5 maturity levels  Maturity levels are defined as sets of processes in CMMI  ISO standard about assessment of organisational maturity Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

7 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 7  Is maturity just a scale of ”something” observable in high quality organisation?  Judgement based  Indirect, indicative, composite  Or is maturity concept a real model? ... To use as basis for assessment of any organisation? ... To use as source for improvement?  Or even to to follow as ”true believer”?  Why?  Because I am a member of the ISO team to work with related standards Essential question to me

8 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 8 Crosby: The Stages of Organisational Maturity  Stage 1:Uncertainty.  Stage 2:Awakening.  Stage 3:Enlightenment.  Stage 4:Wisdom.  Stage 5:Certainty. from Phillip Crosby, Quality is Free 14

9 Crosby: QMMG model (Quality is free, 1979) Measurement Categories Stage I: Uncertainty Stage II: Awakening Stage III: Enlightenment Stage IV: Wisdom Stage V: Certainty Management understanding and attitude No comprehension of quality as a management tool. Tend to blame quality department for "quality problems" Recognising that quality management may be of value but not willing to provide money or time to make it happen. While going through quality improvement program learn more about quality management; becoming supportive and helpful. Participating. Understand absolutes of quality management. Recognise their personal role in continuing emphasis. Consider quality management an essential part of company system. Quality organisation status Quality is hidden in manufacturing or engineering departments. Inspection probably not part of organisation. Emphasis on appraisal and sorting. A stronger quality leader is appointed but main emphasis is still on appraisal and moving the product. Still part of manufacturing or other. Quality Department reports to top management, all appraisal is incorporated and manager has role in management of company. Quality manager is an officer of company; effective status reporting and preventative action. Involved with consumer affairs and special assignments. Quality manager on board of directors. Prevention is main concern. Quality is a thought leader. Problem handling Problems are fought as they occur; no resolution; inadequate definition; lots of yelling and accusations Teams are set up to attack major problems. Long-range solutions are not solicited. Corrective action communication established. Problems are faced openly and resolved in an orderly way. Problems are identified early in their development. All functions are open to suggestion and improvement. Except in the most unusual cases, problems are prevented. Cost of quality as % of sales Reported: unknown Actual: 20% Reported: 3% Actual: 18% Reported: 8% Actual: 12% Reported: 6.5% Actual: 8% Reported: 2.5% Actual: 2.5% Quality improvement actions No organised activities. No understanding of such activities. Trying obvious "motivational" short- range efforts. Implementation of the 14-step program with thorough understanding and establishment of each step. Continuing the 14-step program and starting Make Certain Quality improvement is a normal and continued activity. Summation of company quality posture "We don't know why we have problems with quality" "Is it absolutely necessary to always have problems with quality?" "Through management commitment and quality improvement we are identifying and resolving our problems" "Defect prevention is a routine part of our operation" "We know why we do not have problems with quality"

10 Some other approaches

11 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 11 Short History of CMM + CMMI  Based on Quality Models, like Deming and Crosby  First draft for DoD published in 1987, Watts Humpfrey  Watts Humpfrey book about software management in 1989  CMM v. 1.0 published in 1991, v. 1.1 in 1993, staged model (Mark Paulk and others)  System CMM in 1994, continuous SPICE like model  Several other models, like Acquisition CMM, People CMM, System Safety CMM, Product Development CMM  First integration started 1997 and failed, again during 1998-2000 leaded to CMMI  Current version CMMI 1.2 (development, services, acquisition)  Two versions: Staged and Continuous

12 CMMI-DEV Staged Representation: 22 PAs by Maturity Levels LevelFocusProcess Areas 5 Optimising Continuous Process Improvement Organisational Innovation and Deployment Causal Analysis and Resolution 4 Quantatively Managed Quantative Management Organisational Process Performance Quantative Project Management 3 Defined Process Standardisation Requirements Development Technical Solution Product Integration Verification Validation Organisational Process Focus Organisational Process Definition + IPPD Organisational Training Integrated Project Management + IPPD Risk Management Decision Analysis and Resolution 2 Managed Basic Project Management Requirements Management Project Planning Project Monitoring and Control Supplier Agreement Management Measurement and Analysis Process and Product Quality Assurance Configuration Management 1 Initial Quality Productivity Risk Rework

13 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 13 Short History of SPICE (ISO15504)  SPICE was started as ISO SC7 preliminary study in 1991  Standardisation effort started early 1993  Technical Report ISO15504 published in 1998: Software Process Assessment (9 parts)  Trials in parallel with standard development  Final IS in 2004 – 2006: ISO15504 Process Assessment (6 parts)  Assessment of organisational maturity as one new topic  Several domain specific models published (Space, Automotive, Medical Electronics, Nuclear...)  Well harmonised and aligned with CMMI development Renewal of standard is just starting – window of opportunity for new ideas

14 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 14 The Concept of Process Capability in SPICE (and in CMMI)  Process capability:  To achieve required results (outcomes) using the process  “The better process, the better results”  Capability assessment:  Assessment of process using defined measurement framework and evidences of process (indicators, work products) Low capability High capability

15 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 15 Organisational Maturity in SPICE  Organizational maturity: the extent to which an organization consistently implements processes within a defined scope (note – this scope will be the scope of the PRM) that contribute to the achievement of its business goals (current or projected)  Organizational maturity level: a point on the ordinal scale (of organizational maturity) that characterises the maturity of the organization in the scope of the model used; each level builds on the maturity of the level below  Basic process set: the set of processes from the selected Process Reference Model that are fundamental to achieving the business goals of the organization.  Extended process set: The extended process set includes processes that ensure the achievement of process attributes at levels higher than 1 for all the processes in the basic process set.

16 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 16 Organizational Maturity Model, architecture ML3 ML2 ML4 ML1 ML5

17 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 17 Organisational Maturity Scale 0 – 5 (ordinal) 0Immature The organization does not demonstrate effective use of its implemented processes to support its business. At least one process in its core process set is assessed at Capability Level 0. 1Basic The organization demonstrates achievement of the purpose of the processes that are fundamental to support its business 2Managed The organization now demonstrates effective management of the processes that are fundamental to support its business. 3Effective The organization now demonstrates effective definition and deployment of the processes that are fundamental to support its business. 4Predictable The organization now demonstrates a quantitative understanding of relevant processes that are fundamental to achieving its business goals, in order to establish consistent and predictable performance. 5Optimized The organization now demonstrates the ability to change and adapt the performance of the processes that are fundamental to achieving its business goals in an systematically planned and predictable manner.

18 An Exemplar List of Processes at each Maturity Level

19 15.4.2009, Risto Nevalainen 19  Process based maturity, like in CMMI  Quantitative management, based on facts, data and analyses  Special and common causes of variation  Performance models  Business based maturity, something what is in EFQM  Customer and market results, customer satisfaction  Internal results  Competence development  Further discussions for example in next ISO SC7 meeting and in SPICE2009, ”Living High Life” High Maturity as an actual hot topic

Download ppt "Different Maturity Approaches Laatuseniorien kokous, 15.4.2009 Risto Nevalainen."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google