Several problems in the CMM assessment
This article is welcome to reprint, you are welcome to communicate discussions. Contact: Gao Wei (net name DRCMM), W-Gao @ 263.net, 13851926012. Please keep this statement when reproduced, thank you.
Foreword: This article refers to an article on the IEEE magazine in February 2000. The author analyzes some of the problems in SCE from the purchaser and software enterprise, and finally ask: "Is CMM assessment still believe in?" China software company's CMM assessment, full of impetuous, show and utilitarian atmosphere . The whole CMM evaluation process, we see a good giant government industry authorities, consistently love the lively news media, have a mediator who makes a white do not earn, the certificate of the certificate, the company, the software company, willing to spend money . This strong utilitarian assessed by CMM, making "Gaming the assessment" becomes the consensus and "secrets of nothing" in software companies. It is hoped that this paper has a role in the domestic software industry to treat CMM, do not find a "certificate carrying", "one hand, one hand, transfer," as a director of the company. After all, it is the most important thing to improve the core competitiveness of the company.
1 The qualification of the evaluator SEI is stricter, but the assessment is carried out by an assessment team. Question 1: It is difficult to assess the qualifications of the team. Typically, the assessment team is difficult to meet the technical and management background of software engineering required by SEI. Question 2: The assessment personnel are mostly managers, and the technical quality is generally weaker. This question also includes the director evaluator, due to years of separation from software development practices, the director's assessor is even interested in avoiding technical issues, but repeatedly inquire about management issues. Because the technical quality of the evaluator is generally weaker, the key practice interpretation ability of the project part involving the CMM is poor. Even when the employee is interviewed, when the employee mentioned technical problems, the assessment will open the topic and go to management issues.
2 The time pressure of the assessment is generally evaluated for about a week, and the work to be implemented is quite, the time is very pressure. The original assessment method requires a single interview method, and later, in the new version, the "Group Interview" is added to the new version. Question 3: The group interview is originally in order to save time. In fact, it often covers the problem and cannot find the real situation. The interview of the Lenovo test department is the way in group interviews. For the assessment group, due to time, they often don't want to use their insights and professional judgment, but is satisfied with a strike on the checklist, which is commonly known as "Checklist forced". Question 4: "Checklist obsessive disorder" also gave the opportunity for a drilling empty space for the software. Software companies can strive to make documents to "facilitate the work of the assessment team". 3 CMM Questionnaire In the CMM evaluation, it is the same set of questionnaires. Even the Americans criticized, "Imagine imagination for doctors, architects or lawyers to investigate the same set of test papers, and the indexing of software companies is indeed a constant questionnaire. Think about it, these software companies may be Developed our national defense system! "Question 5: The same set of maturity questionnaires. The CMM assessment allows companies to train employees before assessing, and this training is often distorted. Many software companies and even "teaching" employees have answered "more mature" on the maturity questionnaire.
4 Documents Because the CMM assessment requires documentation to have an online version (which can be managed and controlled by the management software), the company can modify the document when converting the document to an online version. Because the time you know the time of the assessment team, the software company can make the document deliberately and more complicated. If the assessment team sometimes sees the complex document, it will not be willing to go deep, thinking that since it written so much, see the number of pages It should also be met. Question 6: Over-dependent documents. 5 Project Selection Select What item gives the assessment group, here is aware of learning. Software companies can make their most "mature" projects, the best employees form a "Goldern Project" for the assessment team check. Then, this evaluation can be discounted. For example, a software company in China is obviously a "Central Research Institute" of himself, a certain level of CMM, but intentionally confuses audio-visual, intentionally, unconventional, and there is no intention to pass a certain level. Question 7: What project is selected, choose what department, which is too much cat.
6 In advance "training" employees have such a phenomenon, the employee will give him a business CMM instruction manual before accepting the interview, and even asked him to deliberately make a note in the manual, make the manual dirty, to look serious Read. Question 8: "Training" staff works. The most serious problem here is actually the technical quality of the Director's appraiser. Many director's evaluator is only known to "management", and the technical understanding may be limited to 5-10 years ago. The authors of the IEEE magazine article should be "CondUnt On-Site Technical Evaluation" and observe the way the company's actual completion of technology work during evaluation. The author specially raised an example of a company, and the peers on the paper and the Tianyuan don't have the actual peer review. When Paul gave the Lenovo assessment, it did not ask questions from the test department. This fact is too disappointed. In other fields, I really don't believe that I have no words to the test field!
This article is welcome to reprint, you are welcome to communicate discussions. Contact: Gao Wei (net name DRCMM), W-Gao @ 263.net, 13851926012. Please keep this statement when reproduced, thank you.
