Contributions for March Issue of The Best Practice Magazine:
CMMI Articles/Presentations - MPM/MA
*MANAGING PERFORMANCE AND MEASUREMENT (MPM)
Definition of - MA/MPM
*Measurement and Analysis (MA) / Managing Performance and Measurement (MPM)
A 2017 SEI report defines software productivity as the amount of ESLOC per person-month. This definition is from analysing data from 287 complex DOD projects, predominately Real Time. Some 60% of the DOD suppliers concerned are at CMMI Level 4 and above. QSM analysis of the SEI report data shows this SEI productivity definition is misleading and does not enable team performance to be measured or managed by procurement groups or suppliers. QSM quantify the impact of team performance and time pressure in the main software development, the most costly phase. The QSM analysis permits management of team performance in this phase as well as quantifying the cost impact of time pressure. The QSM analysis in the “Typical” Real Time DOD development main phase shows ESLOC per person month varies between 93 and 304. Using DOD labour rate data this corresponds to a cost variation of between $41 and $135 per line of code.
If your organization is using defined processes for project and organizational tasks, you might be ready for some measures to objectively see how well they are being implemented. Measurement data can help an organization identify strengths, weaknesses and provide historical data for future planning. In this article, we give example measures for some common processes used within a project.
If you are using CMMI and implementing Generic Practice (GP) 3.2, the ideas listed below are examples of what could be measured to obtain insight into specific process implementations. Measurements are not required for GP 3.2, they are just one option. Tailor these examples to fit your needs or use them as a starting point to generate your own measurements.
In general selecting a software development methodology has more in common with joining a cult than it does with making a technical decision. Many companies do not even attempt to evaluate methods, but merely adopt the most popular, which today constitute the many faces of agile. This article uses several standard metrics including function points, defect removal efficiency (DRE), Cost of Quality (COQ), and Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) to compare a sample of contemporary software development methods.
ABSTRACT Information security is an essential topic that contributes the success of business operation nowadays. The urgency of applying effective information security can be seen in all business and non-profit entities. The article takes the case of university XYZ that uses private cloud computing as essential tools to support its business processes. The article examines the effective way of measuring the level of information security and CyberSecurity performance that focuses on private cloud use with its recommendations. The article applies the ISO 27001:2013 framework by involving all clauses in Annex A ISO 27001:2013 and COBIT5 for CyberSecurity, section Applying to CyberSecurity. Annex A ISO 27001:2013 and COBIT5 for CyberSecurity is used to measure the information security and CyberSecurity performance, respectively. The article uses a survey method to the employees in the IT division at University XYZ. The article examines the maturity level gap between current and expected results and provides necessary recommendation to improve current situation. The outcome of the article is expected to provide as a reference for information security application in higher education institutions. Keywords: Information Security, CyberSecurity, Private Cloud Computing, ISO 27001, COBIT 5.
During the last few decades, many quality improvement methodologies have been used extensively by organizations to improve products and services. Techniques 1. Introductioncontinuous quality improvement (CQI) and total quality management (TQM) have been used to provide modest, incremental improvements, whereas techniques like reengineering and Six Sigma have been used for making drastic changes to existing processes. like
Two forms of Health Check are offered the Silver Appraisal (SCAMPI B) and Gold Appraisal (SCAMPI A).
Both are led by a Certified CMMI® Lead Appraiser supported by trained Appraisal Team Members.
The primary difference between the two types of Health Check is the level of rigor and the fact that the SCAMPI A Appraisal can provide a Capability Level for each of the PMO Process Area in scope, the results can also be published on the CMMI® Institute PARS Site (Published Appraisal Results) if required.
The key deliverable being a report highlighting strengths and opportunities for improvement. This can optionally be expanded into a comprehensive PMO Improvement Plan the implementation of which can be supported by DEMIX Consultants if required.
If your PMO is not adding the value you expected then perform a DEMIX PMO Health Check to find out why!
To find out more or register interest contact Stephen Woods via the email below: