China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Safety and Security Assurance in Complex Technological Train Control System
Published in Qamar Mahboob, Enrico Zio, Handbook of RAMS in Railway Systems, 2018
Datian Zhou, Ali Hessami, Xiaofei Yao
It can be systematically applied throughout all phases of the realization of a railway system/application, to develop railway-specific RAMS requirements, and to achieve compliance with these requirements. However, the process defined by EN 50126 assumes that the practitioners have business-level policies addressing quality, performance, and safety, which does not normally apply to people outside the European context. To the practitioner who is not sufficiently competent in the thorough and systematic application of EN 50129 in developing a complete system, a feasible way is integrate “well-developed” components of others into their system. Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is a process level improvement training and appraisal program. CMMI was developed by the CMMI project, which aimed to improve the usability of maturity models by integrating many different models into one framework. The integrity process advocated by CENELEC standards is analogous to what CMMI proposed to integrate engineering systems from systems engineering capability model, software engineering from Software CMM v2C, and integrated process and product development from the integrated product development CMM v0.98 in a single model that incorporates both the staged and continuous representations. Integrating some packages of outsourced software into the whole software system requires that the organization is mature enough to solve the problem that not all the parts were fully under control in a single existing framework challenged by the tremendous scale of software development.
Introduction
Published in Boris Mutafelija, Harvey Stromberg, ® v1.2 and ISO Standards, 2008
Boris Mutafelija, Harvey Stromberg
Structural differences also distinguish the frameworks. The process areas and practices in CMMI include the concepts of increasing capability or maturity. These concepts may be applied to individual process areas or to predefined groups of process areas. Within limits, organizations may choose the sequence in which they wish to address the process areas and the targeted capability level. In contrast, the selected ISO standards define the requirements for processes, activities, and tasks but do not describe levels of achievement.
*
Published in Jiuping Xu, Syed Ejaz Ahmed, Zongmin Li, Big Data and Information Theory, 2022
Rosine Salman, Tugrul Daim, David Raffo, Marina Dabic
The practices of the Team Software Process (TSP) help “create a team of software developers that can build a quality product on time and on budget, and where the team is still functional after the product is built”. According to Humphrey (2002), the TSP is designed to build and manage quality software teams. (Humphrey, Davis, & McHale, 2003) attributed this rapid pace of improvement to the organization’s prior introduction and adaptation of the TSP. The CMM/CMMI model requires a considerable amount of time, money and effort to implement and often requires a major shift of culture and attitude in the organizations that decide to apply it (Brooks, 1987; Ibbs & Kwak, 2000; Jiang, Klien, Hwang, Huang, & Hung, 2004). One study in the US software sector found that the median time for an organization to move up one level of five-level CMM/CMMI is between 21 and 37 months (Herbsleb, Zubrow, Goldenson, Hayes, & Paulk, 1997b). Over three-quarters of the organizations reported that implementing any Specific Practice (SP) activity took longer than expected. In addition, an organization’s culture can be adversely impacted by adding to CMMI rigid bureaucracy and reducing the creativity and freedom of the developers (Jones, 1995). Researchers such as Johansen, Mathiassen, Neilsen and Borbjerg have suggested that CMM/CMMI does not deal effectively with the social aspects of IT organizations. (Johansen & Mathiassen, 1998) argue that CMM/CMMI needs a more managerial focus. Iversen, Nielsen and Nørbjerg (2002) explain that “CMM needs to be supplemented with socially oriented theories in order to address organizational change issues and organizational politics”. (Aaen, Arent, Mathiassen, 2001) explain that “the scale and complexity of the organizational change proposed by CMM necessitates a managerial rather than a technical approach”.
3D-CUBE readiness model for industry 4.0: technological, organizational, and process maturity enablers
Published in Production & Manufacturing Research, 2022
Bruna Felippes, Isaac da Silva, Sanderson Barbalho, Tobias Adam, Ina Heine, Robert Schmitt
Since 1991, CMMs have been deployed for various disciplines, like systems engineering, software engineering, software acquisition, workforce management, and development. Although these models have proved useful to organizations, using multiple models has been problematic (Chrissis et al., 2003). The CMM Integration (CMMI) project was formed to sort out the problem of using multiple CMMs, whose combination into a single improvement framework was intended for use by organizations in their pursuit of enterprise-wide process improvement. In fact, in our thesis, more than 8 MMs have CMMI origin (such as Schumacher et al., 2016; Kerrigan, 2013; Schuh et al., 2016; De Carolis et al., 2017; Canetta & Et. Al, 2018; Sjödin et al., 2018; Pirola, Cimini, Pinto et al., 2019; Bandara et al., 2019; and Li et al., 2019 – see, Appendix A).
A Literature Review of Supply Chain Collaboration Mechanisms and Their Impact on Performance
Published in Engineering Management Journal, 2019
Dung Ho, Arun Kumar, Nirajan Shiwakoti
One current model used to manage the capability and maturity of processes in organizations is the well-known Capability Maturity Model (CMM)/Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI). This model is a process maturity framework containing the essential elements of effective processes and providing a path for organizations to a more disciplined development process (Jiang, Klein, Hwang, Huang, & Hung, 2004; Ngai, Chau, Poon, & To, 2013). The CMM/CMMI model supports two improvement paths, using capability and maturity levels that correspond to continuous and staged representation approaches. The continuous form enables the organization to achieve capability levels by incrementally improving the processes of an individual process area (or group of process areas) selected by the organization. The staged form enables the organization to achieve maturity levels through improving a set of related processes of process areas (Farr & Buede, 2003; Team, 2010). The continuous representation organizes process capability into three levels, and the staged representation organizes process areas into five maturity levels.
Utilising a capability maturity model to optimise project based learning – case study
Published in European Journal of Engineering Education, 2018
Abdullah Al Mughrabi, Martin Jaeger
In order to properly evaluate the PBL course, the PBLCMM shall follow a specific path according to the currently well-established, standardised evaluation methods used in the CMMI (Paulk, Curtis, and Chrissis 1991). The CMMI incorporates a three-level evaluation method to conduct a comprehensive evaluation for an organisational entity, known as Scampi A, Scampi B and Scampi C. Scampi A is considered the most detailed and comprehensive method of evaluation utilised in a CMMI including the Planning;Data collection;Data consolidation and validation;Rating; and,Review and feedback.