Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
in a prescriptive way. This is not the way the model was intended to be used
by its authors, nor would this approach help achieve the goal my client is
looking for.
If I were to use the prescriptive approach each time I found a potential weak-
ness against the model, I would “impose” something extra for the
organization to do, and therefore add work on top of what they already do
without fully understanding the value of that added work.
This approach, in my view, would be a huge mistake particularly in a suc-
cessful Agile organization that is relying on their existing proven “Agile
culture” to continue to bring them the success they have achieved in the past.
This approach may appear to be the most direct way to prepare the organiza-
tion for a formal appraisal. It would also be the easiest thing to do as a
consultant because it requires the least amount of effort.
However, from experience I know it is also the fastest way to raise the risk of
driving this organization away from its Agile culture, leading it to a less effi-
cient process than it currently has. Each time I take this approach to a
potential weakness, I raise the risk of making this organization less competi-
tive in the future.
I have observed that many process improvement professionals take this
approach, and I understand why. It is natural to assume that people who
developed the CMMI model are probably smarter than most process people
are and the likelihood is that most organizations should be complying with
whatever expected practices exist within the model.
What is frequently missed in this line of reasoning is the following
implied
myth
:
MYTH
The CMMI developers understood when they came up with the
model all the business situations where the model might be applied.
This myth rests at the core of why we so often hear that Agile approaches
conflict with the CMMI. When the model is used this way we are inappropri-
ately utilizing the model to dictate implementation, or “how to” issues the
model was never meant to address.
I will explain further how to handle these apparent conflicts as they arise, and
why the vast majority turns out to be no conflict at all. First, we need to dis-
cuss the recommended plan to move forward subsequent to the gap analysis.
