People -- was [RE: CMM thoughts; was: RE: [AM] Article of Interest in CIO Maga

Hi all [responding to Paul and others who have contributed to the initial
thread]...

Thanks for an active discussion on this topic.  As usual, I am learning
tons.  After lurking here quietly for a few years, I'd like to start asking
more questions and throwing in my two cents when I can.  

Regarding CMM.... In the end, it seems that CMM Level X only really shows
that a small percentage of an organization can repeat some type of
documented process (seems a lot like the ISO stuff except without the
ongoing certification checks).   One of the points made in the article is
that there is no governing body to say who is really certified (yes the SEI
has people certified to bla bla bla), and that anyone who just blindly
believes that an organization is CMM Level X should do their homework.  I
think that applies to any process or methodology.

Which leads me to.... 

Another part of the threads on topic kept trying to address what
methodologies to use.  I know I am preaching to the choir, and others have
said this.  Hang with me for a minute.

While working in this industry for only 15 years (still a newbie in relation
to many people on the list) and working on both prescriptive waterfall and
"agile" projects, I have found that the end user / customer does not care
what methodology is used to get to the end result -- working systems.

People are the main input to any of the methodologies -- either prescriptive
or agile or whatever combination is used.  I have seen both prescriptive and
agile based projects fail, and usually the process is blamed.  When it is a
success, it is usually transparent to the end user/customer/other
stakeholders and the process may not even be mentioned.  As an industry I
continue to see IT departments get slammed because they cannot deliver.  The
trust is blown away between the various stakeholders and the IT departments.
Sometimes consultants get called in.  Silver bullets may or may not be
promised.  A new attempt is made.  People moan about it.  The cycle
continues, until.... ?????

I'd like to get feedback on the ?????....  I have some thoughts but want to
see if this leads anywhere (or more specifically... Where it leads).

Just want to throw this out for thought (smile).

- mike vizdos 

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Oldfield [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 12:51 AM
To: INTERNET:[email protected]
Subject: CMM thoughts; was: RE: [AM] Article of Interest in CIO Magazine

(responding to Mike)

> Just looking at that magazine last night... It has on the cover, 
> "Bursting the CMM Hype" How to probe CMM claims, 12 critical questions 
> to ask.  Have not read it yet but on my list.  Might be good to 
> discuss here.

Having had a quick look at the article and questions, I find I might want to
take the discussion in at least 3 different directions.
Yet if I investigate the directions, they all have an underlying theme.
While I have great respect for the list of goals that CMM provides, I have
problems with the assumptions that underly their idea of 'process'; in
particular the ones that result in the idea of 'repeatable process'.  This
seems to be based on an assumption that a shop will be producing the same
broad type of software time after time, so there will be a large degree of
commonality in the process that is needed to develop that software.

{mjv snip}

For more information about AM, visit the Agile Modeling Home Page at www.agilemodeling.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: [email protected]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrKDA.bWnbtk.Z2NtYS1h
Or send an email to: [email protected]

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------