Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Section I
Process Misunderstandings
6.2 NANO Case Study Background and Problem Faced
NANO is an organization that began with about 25 people in 2004 and had
grown to over 80 people by the end of 2007. Continued rapid growth was
projected. They had been very successful, which was part of why they were
growing rapidly. Their customer, the U.S. Department of Defense, liked their
product and kept coming back with more work—but NANO had a problem.
NANO is part of a much larger organization. A competing group with a
CMMI level 5 claimed this work fell within their defined charter. As this
other group positioned itself to take business away from NANO, politics and
in-fighting became an issue.
On the surface, it appears NANO's future is doomed except for one thing.
Whenever the customer sent work to the CMMI level 5 group, they took
three times as long to get the work done and cost twice as much as NANO.
In 2008, I conducted a gap analysis against the CMMI model for NANO.
While they were very good at what they did, in 2007 they had no written
processes. NANO was an “Agile-like” organization that existed in the mid-
dle of a non-Agile world and was fighting for its survival. A CMMI level 3
would go a long way to secure its future by substantiating the argument that
they possessed the credentials necessary to be successful as they grew. They
contracted my services originally in 2007 to help them initiate a CMMI
process improvement effort.
6.3 How NANO Achieved Success and Then Got in
Tr o u b l e
When I conducted the gap analysis at NANO, one of the first persons I inter-
viewed was the Director of the organization. I asked him what he really
wanted to come out of this effort. He replied:
I know the way we are currently operating is not sustainable with our
planned growth. We need to do some things differently.
