Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
training, we also
incrementally
modified the PPQA checklist to align with the
process and product template expectations.
Because of the culture at GEAR, a degree of the “policeman” role was
required, but as the organization matures, its quality culture can also evolve
an appropriate balance of the mentor/helper perspective.
INSIGHT
We all want to trust people. However, even the best people
have weaknesses, and therefore we need mechanisms on both traditional
and Agile projects to ensure trust is warranted.
7.36 The Power of Criteria to Aid Agility
There exists a powerful
Agility-Enhancing
mechanism that is sprinkled
throughout the CMMI model. Unfortunately, far too often this mechanism is
underused. Let us set the context for this discussion with a few common sce-
narios.
During my interviews at GEAR, I heard stories about testing and peer
reviews. The two scenarios I will share from GEAR are scenarios I have often
heard in traditional development organizations. This kind of information
usually emerges when I ask developers what could help them do their job
more effectively.
One software developer responded:
I know peer reviews are important, but sometimes I just have to make a
minor fix to my software. I often work on small projects where I am the only
software developer. The company rules require that I get another software
developer to peer review my change. Sometimes it's hard to find someone
who has the time, and many times that person doesn't know anything about
the code I am changing. It just seems like there ought to be some flexibility in
the peer review requirements. There are times when I feel the situation doesn't
warrant the need for a peer review.
And a different software engineer made a similar comment with respect to
testing, saying:
Sometimes I just have to make a small change, but our testing process makes
me go all the way back and go through multiple levels of regression testing.
