Module - Design, Development and Creativity
Class or Article - Article
Lesson or Name - Royce, W. (2002)
CMM vs CMMI: from
conventional to
modern software
management
Additional Info - N/A
Reading this it was very insightful for me to learn about two of the biggest methodologies and frameworks within the technology and systems development industries. These are both two frameworks I have come across but had very little exposure to. I enjoyed this article but I find it very biased towards CMMI. No doubt there is a market shift towards agile and sprits away from the conventional waterfall approach that some companies follow but I do not feel it is an adequate enough excuse to render a framework invalid and to justify to move on. Frameworks are not a one size fits all and as Royce even presents there are good and bad in both along with similarities. I feel Royces advocation for CMMI is blinkered and he is not considering the wider picture, CMMI will not work in every instance of replacing CMM. There is a certainly a time in place for both, there is potential to use the best practices and components from each equally. Companies like Spotify who use the best practices from different frameworks in order to see what suits their development and business best are an example of this. I feel frameworks need to be looser in terms of recognising their own weaknesses and utilise other frameworks to assist in filling that void. This I feel would lead to better software development projects and technology deliveries while also advocating frameworks and their interpretability. This flexibility would also allow companies of all scales use best practices from all industries giving them a best in class project framework.
It is time frameworks look to others for best practice, build on others, accept some frameworks will work for some and not for others and that there is more power and advocacy in interoperatability between frameworks and best practices. Taking this approach in turn will allow businesses to thrive and advocate the framework/process itself.
Precis
In this reading 'CMM vs CMMI: from conventional to modern software management' Royce looks at moving from the CMM to CMMI and how CMM in the form of CMMI has been enhanced to accommodate the new style of software development. Royce present what he perceives as the issues with CMM, provides a CMMI overview, presents the top 10 principals for CMM and CMMI, compares and contrasts them and then draws conclusion. CMM is not obsolete and in instances provides a solid framework which may work for some companies however CMMI. Interestingly CMMI is CMM but facilitating a more agile approach rather than the waterfall approach of CMM. Royce reveals the benefits to both and that is displayed in the comparison the best of both practices. Royce concludes that it is time to move on from CMM and move to CMMI as the best practice of the industry.
Reflection
Reading this it was very insightful for me to learn about two of the biggest methodologies and frameworks within the technology and systems development industries. These are both two frameworks I have come across but had very little exposure to. I enjoyed this article but I find it very biased towards CMMI. No doubt there is a market shift towards agile and sprits away from the conventional waterfall approach that some companies follow but I do not feel it is an adequate enough excuse to render a framework invalid and to justify to move on. Frameworks are not a one size fits all and as Royce even presents there are good and bad in both along with similarities. I feel Royces advocation for CMMI is blinkered and he is not considering the wider picture, CMMI will not work in every instance of replacing CMM. There is a certainly a time in place for both, there is potential to use the best practices and components from each equally. Companies like Spotify who use the best practices from different frameworks in order to see what suits their development and business best are an example of this. I feel frameworks need to be looser in terms of recognising their own weaknesses and utilise other frameworks to assist in filling that void. This I feel would lead to better software development projects and technology deliveries while also advocating frameworks and their interpretability. This flexibility would also allow companies of all scales use best practices from all industries giving them a best in class project framework.
It is time frameworks look to others for best practice, build on others, accept some frameworks will work for some and not for others and that there is more power and advocacy in interoperatability between frameworks and best practices. Taking this approach in turn will allow businesses to thrive and advocate the framework/process itself.
Quotes
Comments
Post a Comment