A Tailorable Software Process MiniAssessment Method

1
A Tailorable Software Process Mini-Assessment
Method
SEPG 99 Conference
Diane L. McDonald Carol A. Pilch GTE Government
Systems
2
Agenda

• Background
• Mini-Assessment Approach
• Comparison (formal assessment vs.
  mini-assessment)
• Results and Lessons Learned
• Conclusion

3
Background

• Achieve goals of GTEs Corporate Quality
  Initiative
• Provide an efficient appraisal technique
• Reduce cost and resource impact
• De-emphasize ratings
• Focus on needed improvements

4
Approach

• Utilize key elements of SEIs CMMSM Based
  Appraisal for Internal Process Improvement (CBA
  IPI) method
• Select experienced assessment team members
• Tailor based on the organization
• Experience/status in process improvement
• Sponsors objectives
• Evaluate and mitigate tailoring risks
• Utilize reusable assessment assets
• Refine Mini-Assessment process using lessons
  learned

5
CBA IPI vs Mini-Assessment Comparison

• Resources
• team members (120-150 hours vs. 40-60 hours)
• participants (2-4 hours vs. 1-2 hours)
• Pre-onsite schedule (2-3 months vs. 3-4 weeks)
• Onsite schedule (7-10 days vs. 3-5 days)
• Team training (3 days vs. 3-4 hours)
• Formality (formal vs. informal plans briefings)
• Outputs (strengths, weaknesses, ratings vs.
  primarily weaknesses, no ratings)

6
CBAIPI Mini-Assessment ComparisonPre-Onsite
Activities
CBA IPI
Identify Scope/ Develop Plan
Brief Asmt. Participants
Conduct Initial Doc. Review
Assemble Site Packet
Complete/Exam. MQs
Prepare Train Team
Conduct Exec Briefing
Develop EQs
GTE Mini-Assessment
Identify Scope/ Develop Plan
Conduct Initial Doc. Review
Complete/Exam. MQs
Develop EQs
EQsExploratory Questions MQsMaturity
Questionnaires
7
Tailoring Options RisksPre-onsite Activities
PLsProject Leads FARsFunctional Area Reps
8
CBAIPI Mini-Assessment ComparisonOnsite
Activities
Interview PLs
Prep. Draft Findings
Consolidate Info
Pres. Final Findings
CBA IPI
Conduct Opening Mtg.
Pres. Draft Findings
Consolidate Info
Interview MMs
Conduct Exec Mtg./Wrapup
Interview FARs
Consolidate Info
Consol/Rate/Prep Final Findings
GTE Mini-Assessment
Consolidate Info
Interview MMs
Pres. Final Findings
Conduct Opening Mtg.
Prepare Train Team
Prep. Draft Findings
Interview PLs
Interview FARs
Conduct Exec Mtg./Wrapup
MMsMiddle Mgrs.
9
Tailoring Options RisksOnsite Activities
10
Tailoring Options RisksOnsite Activities
(cont.)
11
Reusable Assessment Assets

• Mini-Assessment schedule
• Mini-Assessment planning/preparation checklist
• Consolidation tools (KPA worksheets)
• Document indexes
• Briefing templates
• Sample EQs (various interview groups)
• Sample findings

Refer to handouts
12
Results Lessons Learned

• Well-defined process based on CBA IPI activities
• Flexibility to address specific sponsor and
  organization objectives
• Accurate results with strong organization buy-in
• Focus on weaknesses relative to CMM key practices
• Small teams (4-6)
• Balance site knowledge and CBA IPI method
  experience

13
Conclusion

• Using this scaled-down assessment approach based
  on the CBA IPI, GTE has accelerated software
  process improvement
• stronger buy-in due to frequency and visibility
• credibility/demand due to accurate results and
  efficiency
• insight into common pitfalls/trends
• consistency and sharing of best practices
• pilots to improve CBA IPI efficiency
• Accurate results provide input to plans that keep
  organizations on track

14
Contact Information

• Diane McDonald
• GTE Government Systems
• 100 Ferguson Drive
• Mountain View, CA 94043
• 650-966-2902
• diane.mcdonald_at_gsc.gte.net

Carol Pilch GTE Government Systems 77 A
Street Needham, MA 02404 781-455-3422 carol.pilch_at_
gsc.gte.com