Contributions for May Issue of The Best Practice Magazine:
CMMI Articles/Presentations - RDM / PR
*REQUIREMENTS DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT (RDM) & PEER REVIEWS (PR)
Definition of - RDM / PR
*REQUIREMENTS DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT (RDM) & PEER REVIEWS (PR)
RDM Intent Elicit requirements, ensure common understanding by stakeholders, and align requirements, plans, and work products.
PR Intent Identify and address work product issues through reviews by the producer's peers or Subject Matter Experts (SMEs).
Today there are a lot of misunderstandings when it comes to the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI®)  and peer reviews. But why should you care? First, peer reviews are an expected practice and required to achieve CMMI compliance. Second, while peer reviews are commonly held today, the way these reviews are often conducted is costing many organizations wasted time and effort, and failing to provide the promised higher performance payback on their investments. In some Summary cases, poor peer review practices may result in delaying, or not achieving, CMMI compliance. Recent case study data  reveals a major cause of these failures can be traced to the fact that many organizations don’t realize the options and flexibility they have to use peer reviews to gain higher organizational performance.
This white paper provides straight talk and advice on what the CMMI really requires with respect to peer reviews, how to get the most value from your peer reviews, and what to look for in peer review software to improve the performance of your organization while achieving CMMI compliance. You will learn techniques to eliminate wasted effort while tuning your team’s performance for optimal competitive advantage.
Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI) is the nonprofit applied research arm of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, GA. The Electronic Systems Laboratory (ELSYS) of GTRI achieved a CMM Level 3 rating in June of 2003. ELSYS employs 150 engineers and scientists working predominately on DoD related competitively bid contracts. Over the last 30 years, ELSYS researchers have established national reputations in areas such as: monopulse countermeasures, advanced radar warning receiver design, survivability, simulation models and analysis, and Electronic Countermeasures (ECM) technique development. GTRI/ELSYS core competencies include software and systems engineering for electronic warfare and avionics systems, reliability and maintainability upgrades, technology insertion, obsolescence programs, threat analysis, and mission critical software.
Over the last many months the Engineering Organization at DotNetNuke Corp. has been making many process changes to deliver high-quality Software. As Scrum Master and Lead Developer, I’d like to dedicate a blog series on what we did, how it helped and the lessons we learned. In this blog, I’d like to talk specifically about Peer Code Review that we implemented over 10 months ago.
Ever-increasing legal and regulatory requirements have an impact on Agile’s ability to respond to customers’ needs in a timely, effective and efficient manner. To limit that impact and maximize value delivery to the organization, a governance of enterprise IT (GEIT) system focused on managing IT risk within the Agile environment is required. A GEIT system enables the enterprise to take full advantage of IT, maximizing benefits, capitalizing on opportunities and gaining competitive advantage.1 Fundamentally, GEIT is concerned with 2 separate but related components: first, the managing of IT-related risk and second, IT value delivery to the business.2
The managing IT risk component requires building an internal control system to protect and control the Agile development process and build trust in its ability to safeguard its assets.3 The value delivery component requires a planned compliance and assurance effort to design the internal controls into the Agile process so its compliance and control assurance evidence generation have minimal impact upon Agile’s responsiveness to market requirements.
Project Definition: Reduce Rework by Reducing Defect Leakage Currently, over 30% of the Software Engineering effort is consumed reworking products already deemed “fit-for-purpose”. A major contributor to this is defect leakage. Defect leakage is calculated as a percentage by summing the defects attributable to a specific phase that are detected in later phases divided by the total number of defects attributable to that phase. Defect leakage is a good indicator of the quality of the different phases of the software process. Defect leakage for the some software development phases is as high as 75%, where as our goal is set at 20%. Not catching and correcting defects at the earliest point in the process leads to cost and budget over-runs due to excessive rework. By investigating what types of defects go undetected during the various phases, corrections can be introduced into the process to help identify the top defect types.
The integration of AIRA — Artificial Intelligence Review Assistant — into Frontiers’ digital peer-review platform enables better, more efficient quality control and manuscript Frontiers peer review now incorporates powerful AI technology to safeguard both manuscript and peer-review quality more efficiently and keep pace with ever-growing submissions. AIRA assists editors, reviewers handling and internal teams by analyzing, interpreting and communicating the quality of submitted manuscripts and the review process, as well as suggesting actions and identifying potential reviewers. Built in-house and fully integrated into the Frontiers Review Forum and internal workflows, these groundbreaking capabilities have already streamlined Frontiers’ publishing process — and will continually drive further optimization through ongoing learning and inclusion of new quality checks.
Nowadays, Web development is growing at a rapid rate with a focus on enhancing user experience. We know that these days most people use mobile through access the web. Which indicates that websites with enhanced UI will remain at the highest point of the pyramid while the rest have a deep increase towards winning the trust of clients. With the help of some major technology such Artificial Intelligence, VR, IoT and social media giants through web development is obviously towards improving the user experience. This is the place the requirement of artificial intelligence (AI) is felt as it’s a leading revolution with a major future.
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: