Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 1© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Process Maturity Profile
Software CMM®
2005 End-Year Update
March 2006
We could not produce this report without the support of the organizations and lead appraisers who reported their appraisal results to the SEISM.
Our many thanks for their continuing cooperation with our data collection and analysis efforts.
CMMI Appraisal Program
The Software Engineering Institute is a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the U.S. Department of Def ense and operated by Carnegie Mellon® University
® CMM and Carnegie Mellon are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Carnegie Mellon UniversitySM SEI is a service mark of Carnegie Mellon University
© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number.
1. REPORT DATE MAR 2006 2. REPORT TYPE
3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2006 to 00-00-2006
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Process Maturity Profile: Software CMM 2005 End-Year Update
5a. CONTRACT NUMBER
5b. GRANT NUMBER
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER
5e. TASK NUMBER
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Carnegie Mellon University ,Software Engineering Institute (SEI),Pittsburgh,PA,15213
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER
9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)
11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)
12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
14. ABSTRACT
15. SUBJECT TERMS
16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT Same as
Report (SAR)
18. NUMBEROF PAGES
31
19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON
a. REPORT unclassified
b. ABSTRACT unclassified
c. THIS PAGE unclassified
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 2© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Thanks for Reporting your Appraisal Results to the SEI
The briefing is only possible due to the cooperation of organizations and individuals sending in their appraisal results to the SEI
Our many thanks for their cooperation with our data collection and analysis efforts.
The SW-CMM appraisals sunset is Dec. 2005. There will be no more update available in the future.
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 3© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
OutlineIntroduction
Current Status
Community Trends
Organizational Trends
Summary
This briefing is based solely on the appraisals reported to the SEI. It cannot be used as a source for an exact indicator of all organizations in the world using SEI models or appraisal methods nor can it be used for certification or verification purposes.
The SEI does not certify organizations. The SEI only licenses SEI partners and SEI authorized lead assessors to conduct appraisals. Neither the SEI nor any other organization is a “certifying authority” of the results from an appraisal. Therefore requests to the SEI to provide information to be used for this purpose can not be fulfi lled. Information provided by the SEI, such as this briefing, is to demonstrate use of its products and services only.
Organizations performing source selection or verification should consider performing an evaluation appraisal. For more information on appraisal methods and for a directory of authorized lead appraisers who can perform them, visit: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/appraisal-program/
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 4© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Introduction - 1: Purpose and SourceCharacterize the process maturity of the software community
This briefing uses information from appraisals using the SW-CMM in:
• CMM®-Based Appraisals for Internal Process Improvement (CBA IPIs) and
• Software Process Assessments (SPAs) and
• Standard CMMI® Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPISM), v1.1
Please visit:
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/appraisal-program/profile/about.html
for additional information or to answer questions you may have about this briefing
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 5© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
This briefing includes three primary sections:
1. Current Status- Snapshot of the software community based on the most
recent appraisal, since 2001, of reporting organizations
2. Community Trends- Global distribution of appraisals- Growth in the number of appraisals performed - Shifts in the maturity profile over time
3. Organizational Trends- Analysis of Key Process Area (KPA) satisfaction - Time to move up in maturity based on change in maturity
level and time between appraisals
Introduction - 2: Briefing Contents
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 6© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Section 1: Current StatusAppraisals conducted from throughand reported to the SEI
• organizations• participating companies• projects• Non-USA organizations
Please refer to: Terms Used in this Report on page 30
1,804996
8,89766.6%
December 20052001
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 7© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Based on most recent appraisal, since , of organizations reporting a maturity level rating
Maturity Profile by All Reporting Organizations
% o
f Org
aniz
atio
ns
1,8042001
5.7%
39.6%37.4%
7.6%9.8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Initial Repeatable Defined Managed Optimizing
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 8© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Based on organizations reporting organization categories
Reporting Organization Categories
3.0%
16.1%
80.9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Military/Federal
DoD/Fed Contractor
Commercial/In-house
% of Organizations
1,804
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 9© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Based on most recent appraisal, since , of
Maturity Profile by Reporting Organization Categories
% o
f Org
aniz
atio
ns
2001 1,804
5.5%
39.9%
36.1%
7.9%10.7%
5.8%
35.1%
47.1%
5.8% 6.2%9.3%
55.6%
22.2%
9.3%
3.7%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Initial Repeatable Defined Managed Optimizing
Commercial/In-house DoD/Fed Contractor Military/Federal
organizations reporting categories and a maturity level rating
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 10© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Based on organizations reporting SIC code. For more information visit: http://www.osha.gov/oshstats/sicser.html
Organization TypeBased on Primary Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code
617
Printing And Publishing0.3%
Chemicals And Allied Products0.5%
Furniture And Fixtures0.2%
Fabricated Metal Products0.5%
Rubber And Misc Plastics Products
0.2%
Finance, Insurance and Real Estate15.1%
Public Administration (Including Defense)
8.8%
Amusement & Recreation Services
0.2%
Transportation Equipment6.5%
Other Services0.2%
Transportation, Communication, Electric, Gas
and Sanitary Services3.6%
Retail Trade0.8%
Construction0.2%
Wholesale Trade0.6%
Primary Metal Industries0.6%
Industrial Machinery And Equipment
3.7%
Electronic & Other Electric Equipment
5.3%
Instruments And Related Products
6.0%
Health Services0.3%
Engineering & Management Services10.0%
Business Services36.5%
Manufacturing23.8%
Services47.2%
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 11© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
2000+1.0%
1001 to 20001.5%501 to 1000
3.6%
301 to 5007.0%
26 to 5018.7%
51 to 7514.5%
76 to 1009.9%
201 to 3008.7%
101 to 20021.9%
25 or fewer13.4%
Based on organizations reporting size data
Organization SizeBased on the total number of employees within the area of the organization that was appraised
201 to 2000+21.7%
1 to 10056.4%
1,775
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 12© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
8.9%
4.5% 7.
4%
4.6%
4.6% 5.8%
5.6% 7.
7%
5.9%
63.3
%
50.0
%
39.7
%
33.7
%
33.5
%
29.7
%
21.0
%
17.2
% 23.1
%
23.5
%
24.9
%
35.8
%
37.4
% 42.3
%
41.8
%
36.1
%
45.2
%
45.3
% 50.0
%
29.4
%
0.4%
6.3%
6.2% 9.
7% 11.3
%
8.4% 8.9% 12
.5%
3.8%
11.8
%
2.5% 3.3%
9.3%
9.7%
8.8%
20.0
%
19.4
% 25.0
%
15.4
%
29.4
%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
25 or fewer 26 to 50 51 to 75 76 to 100 101 to 200 201 to 300 301 to 500 501 to 1000 1001 to 2000 2000+
Initial Repeatable Defined Managed Optimizing
Maturity Profile by Organization SizeBased on the total number of employees within the area of the organization that was appraised
Based on organizations reporting size data and a maturity level rating
The number of organizations for the 2000+ category is small whic h inflates the maturity level bars. Please see page 9 and take this into account. The purpose of this chart is to indicate that all sizecategories contain most, if not all, maturity levels.
1,775
% o
f Org
aniz
atio
ns
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 13© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
USA and Non-USAReporting Organization Categories
4.7%
61.9%
3.0%
11.4%
19.0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Military/Federal
DoD/Fed Contractor
Commercial/In-house
% of Organizations
USA
Non-USA
Based on U.S. organizations and Non-USA organizations reporting organization categories1202602
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 14© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Based on U.S. organizations and Non-USA organizations reporting categories and a maturity level rating
Maturity Profile by All Reporting USA and Non-USA Organizations
% o
f Org
aniz
atio
ns
10.5%
49.0%
32.2%
4.2% 4.2%3.2%
34.9%
40.0%
9.3%12.6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Initial Repeatable Defined Managed Optimizing
USA Non-USA
1202602
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 15© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
CBA IPIs , SPAs and SCAMPI v1.1 using the SW-CMM conducted since 1987 through and reported to the SEI
• appraisalsCBA IPIsSPAsSCAMPIs
• organizations• participating companies• reappraised organizations• projects
Please refer to: Terms Used in this Report on page 30
Section 2: Community Trends
December 2005
3,9523,330
3,0491,241
70416,540
484138
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 16© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Countries Where Appraisals have been Performed and Reported to the SEI
Argentina Australia Austria Barbados Belgium Brazil CanadaChile China Colombia Costa Rica Cyprus Czech Republic DenmarkEgypt Finland France Germany Greece Hong Kong HungaryIndia Indonesia Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea, Republic ofLatvia Lithuania Malaysia Mauritius Mexico Morocco NetherlandsNew Zealand Norway Pakistan Peru Philippines Poland PortugalPuerto Rico Russia Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain Sri LankaSweden Switzerland Taiwan Thailand Turkey Ukraine United Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom United States Uruguay Venezuela Vietnam
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 17© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Number of Appraisals and Maturity Levels Reported to the SEI by Country
The organization maturity profile, page 6, can be created for certain countries using the Interactive Maturity Profile availablein the Software Engineering Information Repository Web site. Please visit: http://seir.sei.cmu.edu. If you are not already a member of the SEIR web site, please register to join. Registration and use of the site are free.
CountryNumber of Appraisals
Maturity Level 1
Reported
Maturity Level 2
Reported
Maturity Level 3
Reported
Maturity Level 4
Reported
Maturity Level 5
Reported CountryNumber of Appraisals
Maturity Level 1
Reported
Maturity Level 2
Reported
Maturity Level 3
Reported
Maturity Level 4
Reported
Maturity Level 5
Reported
Argentina 12 No Yes Yes No Yes Mauritius 10 or fewer
Australia 36 Yes Yes Yes No Yes Mexico 34 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Austria 10 or fewer Morocco 10 or fewer
Barbados 10 or fewer Netherlands 25 Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Belgium 17 Yes Yes Yes No No New Zealand 10 or fewer
Brazil 32 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Norway 10 or fewer
Canada 85 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Pakistan 10 or fewer
Chile 29 Yes Yes Yes No Yes Peru 10 or fewer
China 354 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Philippines 13 No Yes Yes No Yes
Colombia 10 or fewer Poland 10 or fewer
Costa Rica 10 or fewer Portugal 10 or fewer
Cyprus 10 or fewer Puerto Rico 10 or fewer
Czech Republic 10 or fewer Russia 10 or fewerDenmark 10 or fewer Saudi Arabia 10 or fewer
Egypt 10 or fewer Singapore 23 Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Finland 10 or fewer South Africa 10 or fewer
France 151 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Spain 28 No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Germany 76 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Sri Lanka 10 or fewer
Greece 10 or fewer Sweden 10 or fewer
Hong Kong 12 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Switzerland 10 or fewer
Hungary 10 or fewer Taiwan 10 or fewer
India 422 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Thailand 23 Yes Yes Yes No No
Indonesia 10 or fewer Turkey 10 or fewer
Ireland 11 Yes Yes Yes No No Ukraine 10 or fewer
Israel 32 Yes Yes Yes No NoUnited Arab Emirates 10 or fewer
Italy 40 Yes Yes Yes No Yes United Kingdom 144 Yes Yes Yes No No
Japan 177 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes United States 2035 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Korea, Republic of 78 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Uruguay 10 or fewer
Latvia 10 or fewer Venezuela 10 or fewer
Lithuania 10 or fewer Vietnam 10 or fewer
Malaysia 10 or fewer
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 18© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Based on appraisals conducted through and reported to the SEI
Number of SW-CMM Appraisals Reported to the SEI by Year
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
First Appraisal Reappraisal
3,952 Dec 2005
Num
ber
of A
ppra
isal
s
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 19© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Based on appraisals reporting organization categories
Number of SW-CMM Appraisals Reported to the SEI by Organization Categories and Year
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Commercial/In-house DoD/Fed Contractor Military/Federal
Num
ber
of A
ppra
isal
s
3,950
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 20© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
80.3
%
12.1
%
7.6%
64.4
%
21.9
%
12.0
%
1.4%
0.3
%
37.3
%
33.9
%
20.2
%
4.5%
4.2%
32.2
% 35.8
%
20.9
%
5.9%
5.2%
27.5
%
37.1
%
23.0
%
5.9% 6.4%
24.2
%
37.0
%
25.8
%
6.2% 6.7%
21.9
%
36.1
%
28.9
%
5.9% 7.1
%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Initial Repeatable Defined Managed Optimizing
1987-19911992-19961997-20012002200320042005
Trends in the Community Maturity Profile%
of O
rgan
izat
ions
Based on a cumulative view of the most recent appraisals of organizations up through the year indicated. This accounts for the difference from the figures on page 5.
Year Orgs132635
1,6601,9982,4232,7723,049
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 21© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Section 3: Organizational TrendsAppraisals conducted through and reported to the SEI
• Key Process Area (KPA) profiles- satisfaction of KPAs by maturity level for organizations
appraised at levels 1 and 2
• reappraised organizations- accounting for appraisals- although some organizations conducted multiple
reappraisals, only the first and latest appraisals were used in creating the charts on pages 23 & 24
Please refer to: Terms Used in this Report on page 30
704
1,956
December 2005
1,617
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 22© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Based on CBA IPI and SCAMPI with SW-CMM appraisals reporting a maturity level rating
Key Process Area Profiles - 1Organizations Appraised at Level 1
% of Appraisals
582
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
PCM
TCM
DP
SQM
QPM
PR
IC
SPE
ISM
TP
OPD
OPF
SCM
SQA
SSM
PTO
SPP
RM
FullySatisfiedRated
Repeatable
Defined
Managed
Optimizing
Software Subcontract Management (SSM) is not applicable/not rated in many assessments. Please take that into account when interpretingits Fully Satisfied rating.
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 23© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Key Process Area Profiles - 2Organizations Appraised at Level 2
Based on CBA IPI and SCAMPI With SW-CMM appraisals reporting a maturity level rating1374
% of Appraisals
Defined
Managed
Optimizing
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
PCM
TCM
DP
SQM
QPM
PR
IC
SPE
ISM
TP
OPD
OPF
FullySatisfied
Rated
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 24© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Maturity Level of First and Latest Appraisal
% o
f Org
aniz
atio
ns
39.8% 40.3%
11.2%7.8%
0.9%
7.1%
25.3%
41.8%
8.9%
16.9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Initial Repeatable Defined Managed Optimizing
First Latest
Based on reappraised organizations using their first and latest appraisal704
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 25© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
No Change12.5%
Moved Down2.8%
Level 4 to 57.0%
Level 3 to 55.5%
Level 3 to 43.1%
Level 1 to 41.8%
Level 1 to 311.4%
Level 2 to 52.7%
Level 1 to 220.5%
Level 2 to 43.6%
Level 1 to 51.0%
Level 2 to 328.1%
ReappraisalsChange in Maturity Level
Based on reappraised organizations using their first and latest appraisal704
Level 1 to 1 5.1%Level 2 to 2 4.4%Level 3 to 3 1.8%Level 4 to 4 0.4%Level 5 to 5 0.7%
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 26© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Time to Move Up
Number of months to move to nextmaturity level
Largest observed value that is not an outlier
75th Percentile
25th PercentileMedian
Smallest observed value that is not an outlier
Recommended time between appraisals {
100
30
18
0
50
All (1987 to Present)
1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5200 274 65 64
1992 to Present
1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5175 262 63 64
Pre-1992
1 to 2 2 to 325 12
75
1923
39 40
Time Period of Initial Appraisal
LevelOrgs
2419 20
25
13 13
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 27© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Summary of Current Status
Commercial and in-house organizations reported most appraisals
Of U.S. organizations, the services and manufacturing industries reported most appraisals
Over half of the organizations reporting size have 100 or fewer software personnel
More Non-USA appraisals reported than U.S. in this 5 year snapshot
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 28© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Summary of Organizational Trends - 1
The number of SW-CMM appraisals steadily declined during the two years sunset period (2004-2005) while CMMI SCAMPI appraisals have been rapidly increased (See Process Maturity Profile for CMMI V1.1)
NO SW-CMM appraisals have been reported since Dec. 2005
Software Subcontract Management is the least frequently satisfied level 2 KPA among organizations appraised at level 1
Integrated Software Management is the least frequently satisfiedlevel 3 KPA among organizations appraised at level 2
Higher maturity has been reached among those organizations reporting reappraisals
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 29© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Summary of Organizational Trends (continued) - 2
For organizations that began their CMM-based SPI effort in 1992 or later, the median time to move from:
• maturity level 1 to 2 is 19 months• maturity level 2 to 3 is 19 months• maturity level 3 to 4 is 24 months• maturity level 4 to 5 is 13 months
Note:
Since the September 2005 report, the median time to move from maturity level 2 to 3 dropped from 20 month to 19 month and the median time to move from maturity level 3 to 4 dropped from 25 month to 24 month.
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 30© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Terms Used in this ReportAppraisal - The appraisal methods used in this report are the Software Process
Assessment (SPA), CMM-Based Appraisal for both Internal Process Improvement (CBA IPI) and Standard CMMI® Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI). We do request and receive other Software CMM-based appraisals such as Software Capability Evaluations (SCE) and Interim Profiles. As our sampling size of these other methods increase, they will be reported here.
Company - Parent of the appraised entityA company can be a commercial or non-commercial firm, for-profit or not for-profit business, a research and development unit, a higher education unit, a government agency, or branch of service, etc.
Organization - a.k.a. Appraised entity The organization unit to which the appraisal results apply. An appraised entity can be the entire company, a selected business unit, units supporting a particular product line or service, etc.
Non-USA - Appraised entity whose geographic location is not within the United States. The parent of the appraised entity may or may not be based within the United States.
Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon
Software CMM - CBA IPI, SPA and SCAMPI Appraisal Results
March 2006 Process Maturity Profile - Page 31© 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University
Contact InformationPlease visit:
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/appraisal-program/profile/about.html
and review the information provided before contacting:
SEI Customer Relations (412) 268-5800SEI FAX number (412) 268-5758
Internet [email protected]
Mailing AddressCustomer RelationsSoftware Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburgh, PA 15213-3890