Cmmi5 pursues "both shapes and minds"

From: DIY tribe 2010-03-14

Sei organizes a cmme seminar every year. Most cmme chief evaluators take advantage of this opportunity to learn about the latest sei trends and to socialize with people in the circle. Most of the work of the Chief evaluators is relatively independent. The SEPG conference and the annual cmme seminar have become a rare opportunity for mutual communication and friendship. At the meeting, an American chief evaluator chatted with me about an interesting story. He saw this article on a software engineering blog site in the United States. When the blogger said that he was "young and ignorant", he thought SEI's cmme was good. He thought that his work needed good documents and rigorous process definitions, we also need some high-IQ headers from Carnegie Mellon University to provide guidance. He said that his company was a large IT company, and the company was implementing CMMS to reach level 3 of maturity. Then, he had the result he did not think of at all. He said: "Suddenly, the population of the Office began to fill out various forms and start various kinds of meetings. Meetings were called experience summaries, peer review meetings, or change control meetings. Suddenly, you have to fill in one or even two tables for every task. Do you want to talk to your supervisor? Enter the table. How many people do you want to discuss the design scheme? Enter the table. Do you want to go upstairs to see what old friends are doing? He told you that he is filling out the table ." "However, our bad habits have not changed. They only change the packaging. They now exist in a large number of practices and documents that meet the requirements of cmme. Talented designers still use whiteboards to discuss issues freely, but they need to record the text on the whiteboards and fill in the tables that are considered to be compatible with cmme. The architecture design document is becoming increasingly thick, but no one wants to read it. No one looks at the tables, and no one looks at them-except for those who are insomnia, they no longer need sleeping pills. They can read the document: ZD-91701-software design module-Input Output operation concept." There are still many texts in the blog, but I will reference them here. This blogger's point of view is already very clear. The chief evaluators may have a desire to criticize such words. Of course, I cannot be an exception. But where is the problem? The theme of this year's SEPG conference in Suzhou is "cmme goals: the pursuit of both shapes and shapes ". I think the above problems are explained in the form of a similar relationship with God in the implementation of CMMs. Chinese art, from calligraphy to painting, and even music and go games, is easy and difficult, and there is a process of upgrading from the shape to the Spirit of God. They all focus on the unity of form and God. The so-called "form and spirit" is the highest realm of art. Taking calligraphy as an example, the study begins with a letter, Liu Gongquan, or Yan Zhenqing. If you care about it, you can write it in a matter of two years. However, if we want to copy its charm and write out the bones of the willow, the strength of the face and the power of the face cannot be achieved within five years. Then, we must be able to meet the five things that Su Shi said: God, gas, bone, meat, and blood. We can put the beauty pursuing Artistic Conception on the physical manifestation and use calligraphy to demonstrate our aesthetic pursuit, expressing the Calligrapher's inner world may require half-life contributions. Take go as an example. When playing chess, you should pay attention to the playing style. The entry-level teaching material will show you what kind of chess is "good" and what kind of chess is "stupid ". Playing chess forms a good shape, and the efficiency is high, so you can use a small number of hands to gain greater benefits. However, when you are a beginner, you only know the imitation of go, and you have a superficial understanding of chess. You cannot understand the god of every player. Although they all follow a definite rule, they cannot respond to each other, either by repeating the sub-force or by looking at the opposite, and eventually lose the overall situation, leading to failure. On the contrary, a strong player no longer sticks to playing chess. he can break the patterns and adapt to the changes. He can make a "stupid player", so that the game can continue to win. To sum up, we can say that we are like a god, and it is the beginning of mastering an art. God is like a development that truly reflects the artistic standard. God cannot be separated from the shape, so there is a saying that "God is the form of storage, and God is the form of God. However, God seems to be the ultimate goal of the pursuit, so there is a saying that "the gods of interest. The spirit of God is the perfect pursuit of the Spirit of God. Back to cmme, I think the shape of cmme is embodied in the practices required in the model that exist in the Organization. However, it seems that CMMS truly helps organizations achieve their business goals and reflects the true value of process improvement through ROI. What we strive to achieve at the beginning of the implementation of CMMs is the shape. We started to learn the knowledge of cmme, understand the structure of the model, and understand what is a process domain, what is a process domain goal, and what is a practice in the target. Then we chose a certain range of models and started to practice cmme at the "shape" level. Just like the post of calligraphy, the back-set style of go, At the beginning we often awkwardly imitate a set of document templates that are considered to meet the requirements of cmme to develop our own specifications, we may consider whether the Organization's practices meet the requirements of the cmme, and pay less attention to the true value these practices bring to the Organization. Our goal may be to increase customer satisfaction by a certain percentage and reduce the defect rate by a certain amount of time through the evaluation of cmme, rather than through the implementation of cmme, or increase the percentage of product reliability. The evaluation of CMMs is mostly centered on "shape. We follow rigorous evaluation methods to carry out the evaluation process step by step against rigorous model documents. First, we need to map organizational practices to model practices, and find the so-called "practice implementation indicators" as evidence of practical implementation. We need to discuss the adequacy of the evidence to determine the extent to which these cmme practices have been implemented within the Organization, and finally draw a conclusion to find out the strengths and weaknesses in the organizational practice. The evaluation method requires the adequacy of practice, rather than the quality of practice. In my understanding, the cmme evaluation mainly determines whether the organization can be similar to the practice of the cmme model. However, it is even more important to see the benefits of cmme. Enterprise culture can be said to be a manifestation of the god of CMMs. The cmme practice should not be a rigid dogma in the organization, but a natural process integrating with the corporate culture. On the one hand, the organization builds an enterprise culture that conforms to the CMMS spirit, so that the enterprise culture can transmit information about CMMS virtually; on the other hand, CMMS can promote the construction of enterprise culture in the implementation of the organization, the implementation of CMMS makes enterprise management more harmonious, team atmosphere more harmonious, and employee morale higher. According to some articles, the god of CMMs gathers in the park to find the owners of dogs. It is humorous in the bad weather in Utah, competitors told the story of the past during their dinner and smiled. I agree with this. The concept of CMMs should be measured by the implementation of business goals. By carefully considering the high maturity of CMMS, we have continuously strengthened the importance of quantifying business objectives. The business objectives of an organization are specific and measurable. They are constantly refined at all levels of the organization. The key sub-process of statistical management is selected based on the quantified organization's business objectives. The process performance baseline and model are also set up around the quantified organization's business objectives. When the Organization is striving to achieve a high maturity goal after long-term efforts, if it only achieves the implementation shape, it will find that the process towards high maturity is difficult, the data collected by a large amount of energy cannot be analyzed to produce the desired results, and the performance of the process is delayed. The so-called performance baseline or model has no practical effect on the project. If the process improvement team is frustrated, it may be to think about whether the accumulation of CMMs is sufficient to fully grasp the charm of CMMs. For the story quoted at the beginning of the article, I think they did not do anything wrong in the implementation of CMMS, but they are still in a similar stage, just like in the early days of learning calligraphy, boring ingredients are more than enjoyable. One day, when the blogger reaches the realm of sublimation and understands the charm of CMMS, he may say, "I used to think that CMMS is boring and useless when I was not sensible ......"