people capability maturity model-sei

8/8/2019 People Capability Maturity Model-SEI

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/people-capability-maturity-model-sei 1/77

Maturity Model

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01

September 1995

Overview of the PeopleCapability Maturity ModelSM

Bill Curtis

William E. Hefley

Sally Miller

September 1995



Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon University

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213

Unlimited distribution subject to the copyright.

Maturity Model

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01

September 1995

Overview of the People Capability Maturity ModelSM

Bill Curtis

William E. Hefley

Sally Miller

Capability Maturity Modeling



This report was prepared for the

SEI Joint Program OfficeHQ ESC/AXS

5 Eglin StreetHanscom AFB, MA 01731-2116

The ideas and findings in this report should not be construed as an official DoD position. It is published in theinterest of scientific and technical information exchange.

FOR THE COMMANDER

(signature on file)

Thomas R. Miller, Lt Col, USAFSEI Joint Program Office

This work is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense.

Copyright © 1995 by Carnegie Mellon University.

Permission to reproduce this document and to prepare derivative works from this document for internal use isgranted, provided the copyright and “No Warranty” statements are included with all reproductions and derivative

works.

Requests for permission to reproduce this document or to prepare derivative works of this document for external

and commercial use should be addressed to the SEI Licensing Agent.

NO WARRANTY

THIS CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE MATERIALIS FURNISHED ON AN “AS-IS” BASIS. CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY MAKES NO WARRAN-

TIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, AS TO ANY MATTER INCLUDING, BUT NOTLIMITED TO, WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR PURPOSE OR MERCHANTIBILITY, EXCLUSIVITY, OR

RESULTS OBTAINED FROM USE OF THE MATERIAL. CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY DOES

NOT MAKE ANY WARRANTY OF ANY KIND WITH RESPECT TO FREEDOM FROM PATENT,TRADEMARK, OR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.

This work was created in the performance of Federal Government Contract Number F19628-95-C-0003 with

Carnegie Mellon University for the operation of the Software Engineering Institute, a federally funded research

and development center. The Government of the United States has a royalty-free government-purpose license to

use, duplicate, or disclose the work, in whole or in part and in any manner, and to have or permit others to do so,

for government purposes pursuant to the copyright license under the clause at 52.227-7013.

This document is available through Research Access, Inc., 800 Vinial Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15212.

Phone: 1-800-685-6510. FAX: (412) 321-2994. RAI also maintains a World Wide Web home page. The URL is

http://www.rai.com

Copies of this document are available through the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). For informa-tion on ordering, please contact NTIS directly: National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of

Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161. Phone: (703) 487-4600.

This document is also available through the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC). DTIC provides access

to and transfer of scientific and technical information for DoD personnel, DoD contractors and potential contrac-

tors, and other U.S. Government agency personnel and their contractors. To obtain a copy, please contact DTIC

directly: Defense Technical Information Center / 8725 John J. Kingman Road / Suite 0944 / Ft. Belvoir, VA

22060-6218. Phone: (703) 767-8222 or 1-800 225-3842.]

Use of any trademarks in this report is not intended in any way to infringe on the rights of the trademark holder.



Table of Conten ts

Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................v

Abou t This Document.............................................................................................viiWhat Is the Purpose of This Document?......................................................viiHow Is This Document Organized?................................................................viiBackground.........................................................................................................viiiHow to Receive More Information ...................................................................x

Executive Overview.................................................................................................xiii

Need for the Peop le Capability Maturity ModelSM

......................................xiiiStructure of the P-CMM.....................................................................................xv

1 Introduction .............................................................................................................11.1 Motivation for Impr oving Softw are Developm ent Talent..................11.2 A Matu rity Framewor k for Developing H um an Talent.......................4

1.2.1 P-CMM Objectives.............................................................................41.2.2 The Matu rity Fram ew ork ................................................................4

1.2.2.1 Backgrou nd of the Maturity Framew ork ...............................61.2.2.2 Principles Underlying the Maturity Fram ew ork ..................8

1.2.3 A Family of Matu rity Mod els........................................................10

2 Maturity Levels of the Peop le CMM.................................................................13

2.1 Definition of the P-CMM Matu rity Levels.............................................132.1.1 Level 1 - The Init ial Level..............................................................132.1.2 Level 2 - The Rep eatable Level.....................................................152.1.3 Level 3 - The Defined Level...........................................................172.1.4 Level 4 - The M anaged Level........................................................182.1.5 Level 5 - The Op timizing Level....................................................19

2.2 The Key Pr ocess Areas of the P-CMM ....................................................202.2.1 Key Pr ocess Areas at the Repeatable Level.................................222.2.2 Key Process Areas at the Defined Level......................................232.2.3 Key Process Areas at the Managed Level....................................252.2.4 Key Process Areas a t th e Op timizing Level................................27

2.3 Themes in the P-CMM...............................................................................28

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capability Maturity Model n i



Table of Contents

3 Ap plying the People CMM.................................................................................33

3.1 P-CMM-Based Assessments.......................................................................333.2 Using the P-CMM as a Guid e for Imp rovement ...................................353.2.1 Guidance Provided by the P-CMM...............................................353.2.2 Skipping Matu rity Levels...............................................................36

3.3 Locating a P-CMM-Based Imp rovement Program inthe Organization..........................................................................................37

3.4 Implemen ting a P-CMM-Based Im prov emen t Program ....................383.5 Integrating Matu rity-Based Imp rovem ent Progra ms..........................43

4 References...............................................................................................................45

Ap pend ix: Goals for Each Key Process Area................................................A-1A.1 The Key Process Areas for Level 2: Repeatable...................................A-2A.2 The Key Pr ocess Areas for Level 3: Defined ........................................A-3A.3 The Key Process Areas for Level 4: Man aged ......................................A-4A.4 The Key Process Areas for Level 5: Opt imizing.................................A-6

ii n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01



List of Figures

Figure EO.1 Three Comp onen ts of Imp rovem ent Focus............................xiiiFigure EO.2 The Five Matu rity Levels of the P-CMM .................................xviFigure EO.3 The Key Process Areas Assigned to Process Categories......xviii

Figure 1.1 Three Comp onents of Imp rovement Focus...... .. .. ... .. .. ... ... .. .. ...10Figu re 2.1 The Five Matu rity Levels of the P-CMM ...................................14Figure 2.2 The Key Process Areas of the P-CMM

by Maturity Level.............................................................................21Figure 2.3 The Key Process Areas Assigned to Process Categories...........29

Figure 3.1 The IDEALSM

Model.......................................................................39

Figure A.1 P-CMM Key Process Areas..........................................................A-1

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capability Maturity Model n ii i



Acknowledgments

The People Capability Matu rity ModelSM (P-CMM SM) draw s on the topicsof capa bility matu rity mod els, benchmark pra ctices, and organizationalimp rovem ent to increase an organ ization’s capability to engineer software;and p resents a docum ented roadm ap for organizational imp rovement.

For his contributions and guid ance as the leader of the Capab ility MaturityModelsSM (CMMSM) project, his broad contributions to ou r on goingdiscussions regard ing the evolving d rafts of the P-CMM, and his

continuing sup por t for the P-CMM efforts, w e thank Mike Konrad . WattsHu mp hrey contributed to many d iscussions that led to the developmentand refinem ent of the mod el. Jim Over has shared h is expertise andknow ledge of the Personal Software Process (PSP) [Hu mp hrey95a, 95b] tothe developm ent of the P-CMM. We thank them for their contributions.The extraord inary efforts of Mark Pau lk in the d evelopm ent of theCapability Maturity Mod el for Software established a w orld-class stand ardand enabled th e P-CMM to bu ild on th ese efforts.

We acknow ledge Ron Radice, Floyd Hollister, and Bill Peterson for their

foresight in p rovid ing initial spon sorship for this work , as well as MiriamBrow ning , Cynth ia Kend all (Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense

C3I), LTG Otto Guenth er (U.S. Arm y, DISC4) and David Borland (U.S.Arm y, DISC4) for provid ing the sp onsorship from the U.S. Departm ent of Defense (DoD) necessary to comp lete this work. We also than k ArleneDukanauskas (U.S. Army, DISC4) and Joyce France (Office of the Assistant

Secretary of Defense C3I) for their continued and un failing sup port an dadvice.

We wou ld especially like to thank th e mem bers of the P-CMM AdvisoryBoard w ho have h elped to guide our efforts. In ad dition to providingtechn ical insights, they helped focus ou r effort and w orked w ith us to

SM Capa bility Matu rity Model and CMM are service mar ks of Carnegie Mellon University.

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capability Maturity Model n v



Acknowledgments

evaluate and plan ou r actions to add ress the m any comm ents receivedfrom ind ustry and govern men t reviewers. The current mem bers of theP-CMM Adv isory Board are Dav id Borland (Dept. of the Arm y, Office of the Director of Information Systems for Com ma nd , Control,Comm un ication, and Com pu ters), Miriam F. Brown ing (NationalAcademy of Public Administration), Ed Cotter (Digital EquipmentCorp oration), Barry A. Frew (Naval Postgrad ua te School), Paul Garber(Citicorp), Paul R. Gehrmann (IBM), Glenn Gienko (Motorola), MarleneGriffin-Bunn ell (Eli Lilly & Co.), Watts H umphr ey (Softwa re Engin eeringInstitute), Jam es Jackson (Texas Instru ments), Cynth ia Kend all (Office of Secretary of Defense), Sally Matth ew s (General Services Ad min istration),Jeffrey McHen ry (Microsoft), Rona ld A. Rad ice (Software Techn ology

Transition), Roger T. Sobkow iak (Softwar e Peop le Concepts), and EdThomp son (Ad van ced Research Projects Agency). Former mem bers of theAd visory Board include Belkis Leong-H ong (Office of Secretary of Defense)and Austin Zu llo (Citicorp ).

We greatly ap preciate the efforts of Marlene MacDonald , Angela Miller,Carolyn Tady, Dorothy Josephson, an d Marcia Theoret for theirad ministrative supp ort; and the ed itorial assistance of Sand ra J. Bond andSuzann e Coutu riaux.

v i n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01



About This Document

W h a t I s t h e P u r p o s e of T h i s D o cu m e n t ?

This docum ent provid es an overview and an introdu ction to the PeopleCap ability Matur ity Model (P-CMM) [Curt is95]. Specifically, this docu mentdefines the concepts necessary to u nd erstand the P-CMM and th emotivation and pu rpose behind the P-CMM. This overview d escribes theP-CMM stru ctural compon ents, consisting of key pr ocess areas w ithin thefive m atu rity levels of the P-CMM, and the p rinciples that u nd erlie each

of the matu rity levels. Finally, the docu men t add resses poten tial uses of the P-CMM in assessing org anizational practice or guid ing imp rovem entof an or gan ization’s workforce cap ability.

The docum ent is intended to provide an overview of the comcepts of theP-CMM, while the Peop le Capab ility Matu rity Mod el [Cur tis95] describesthe key p ractices for each level of the P-CMM.

H o w I s Th i s D o cu m e n t O rga n i z ed ?

This d ocumen t consists of an executive overview and three m ajorsections:

Chapter 1 – In t roduct ion Defines the concepts n ecessary to un derstandthe P-CMM and the motivation and p urp osebehind it.

Chapter 2 – M aturit y Describes the five levels of the P-CMM Levels and the principles that und erlie them.

Describes how the P-CMM is structured into

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capability Maturity Model n v ii



About This Document

and man agement, and hu man resources. Version 0.1 of the P-CMM wasreleased for review by th e advisory board in October, 1993. Subsequen t torelease of Version 0.1, the ad visory board investigated best p ractices.

Strategic DoD sponsor ship was obtained d ur ing 1994. The sponsors of thiswork are the

q Arm y Office of the Director of Information Systems for Com ma nd ,Control, Communication, and Computers, Directorate of ArmyInformation

q Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Com mand , Control,Comm un ication, and Intelligence, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Information Man agemen t

P-CMM Draft Version 0.2 was d eveloped based on th e concepts d escribedabove and current best practices. It was widely distributed for review bythe m embers of the P-CMM Ad visory Board , P-CMM Correspond ence

Group 1 , and other interested reviewers, and wa s the sub ject of d iscussionat a N ationa l Workshop , held Decem ber 14-15, 1994, in Virginia.

Following the N ational Workshop, a focused tw o-day working meetingwas h eld to add ress the structure and content of capability ma turitymod els and the interrelationships betw een these mod els. In th is meeting,our discussions focused on p eople- and skills-related topics and issues, andhow these peop le and skills topics map across capability matu rity mod els.

P-CMM Draft Version 0.3 was dev eloped based on extensive feedback (over 1400 comm ents) on P-CMM Version 0.2, as well as ou r continu ed

1You can join the group by contacting Custom er Relations at the Softwa re Engineering Institute,

Carn egie Mellon Un iversity, Pittsbu rgh , PA 15213-3890 (412/ 268-5800; fax: 412/ 268-5758; Intern et:

custom [email protected] .edu ).

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capability Maturity Model n ix



About This Document

efforts to iden tify the best benchm ark p ractices in each of the key p rocessareas. As with Version 0.2, P-CMM Version 0.3 was w idely d istribu ted forreview by th e mem bers of the P-CMM Ad visory Board , P-CMMCorrespond ence Group, and other interested reviewers. Over 1,000 copiesof Draft Version 0.3 were d istributed in h ard copy, and several hu nd redcopies were obta ined electron ically.

P-CMM (Version 1.0) [Curtis95] was released at the 1995 SEI SoftwareEngineering Sym posium , Sept emb er 11-14, 1995, held in Pittsbu rgh ,Pennsylvania.

H ow to Rece ive More In fo rmat ion

For fur ther information regard ing the P-CMM and its futu re associatedprod ucts, including training on the P-CMM and how to perform P-CMM-based assessmen ts, contact

SEI Custom er Relations

Software Engineering InstituteCarn egie Mellon UniversityPittsburgh, PA 15213-3890(412) 268-5800Intern et: custom [email protected] .edu

SEI technical reports are directly available from Research Access Inc. (RAI),the N ationa l Technical Inform ation Service (N TIS), and the D efenseTechn ical Information Cen ter (DTIC). These docum ents can be obtainedby contacting

RAI: Research Access In c.800 Vinial Street

x n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01



About This Document

Pittsbur gh, PA 15212Telephone: (800) 685-6510International: +1-412-321-2992FAX: +1-412-321-2994WWW: ht tp:/ / www .rai.com

NTIS: Nat ional Technica l Information ServiceU.S. Departm ent of Comm erceSpringfield, VA 22161-2103Telephone: (703) 487-4600

DTIC: Defense Technica l Informat ion CenterATTN: DTIC-OCP8725 John J. King man Rd.Suite 0944Ft. Belvoir , VA 22060-6218

Ad d itional information a bou t the SEI, its efforts and pu blications areavailable using th e World Wide Web at

http:/ / www .sei.cmu.edu

Inform ation abou t available P-CMM docum ents is available at

ftp:/ / ftp.sei.cmu.edu/ pu b/ p-cmm/ READ_ME.txt

SEI technical repor ts are also ava ilable via Internet. To obtain the P-CMMvia anony mou s FTP from a Unix system on Internet

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capability Maturity Model n xi



About This Document

ftp ftp.sei.cmu .edulogin: anonymous password: <your u ser id or an y string>cd pub/ p-cmmget READ_ME.txtget <files>quit

The file READ_ME.txt contains inform ation o n w hat files are av ailable.Other SEI pu blications are available in a similar m ann er in th e d irectory / pu b/ docum ents. The Capability Maturity Model for Software is available

in a s imilar manner in the directory / pu b/ cmm .

xii n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01



Executive Overview

Need for the People Capab ility Maturity ModelSM

In order to imp rove their performance, organizations m ust focus on threeinterrelated components—people, process, and technology—shown inFigure EO.1. With the h elp of the Cap ability Maturity Mod elSM forSoftwar e (CMMSM) [Paulk95], many softwar e organizations have m ad ecost-effective, lasting improvements in their software processes andpr actices [Herbsleb94]. Yet man y of these organizations have discovered

that their continu ed improvem ent requ ires significant changes in th e w aythey man age, develop, and use their people for d eveloping andmaintaining software and information systems—changes that are n otfully accounted for in the CMM. To d ate, imp rovem ent prog ram s forsoftwa re organizations hav e often emp hasized p rocess or techn ology, notpeople.

Figure EO.1 Three Componen ts of Improvement Focus

SM Capab ility Matu rity Model and CMM are service mar ks of Carnegie Mellon University.

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capab ility Maturity Mod el n xiii



Executive Overview

To provide gu idance to organizations that w ant to improve th e way theyadd ress these people-related issues, the SEI has d eveloped the PeopleCapability Matu rity ModelSM (P-CMM SM). The P-CMM is a matu rityframework , patterned after the stru cture of the CMM, that focuses oncontinuously imp roving the management and development of thehu m an assets of a softwa re or information systems organization. TheP-CMM provid es guidance on how to continu ously improve the ability of softwar e organizations to attract, develop, motivate, organize, and retainthe talent n eeded to steadily imp rove their software d evelopm entcapa bility. The strategic objectives of the P-CMM are to

q imp rove the capability of softwar e organ izations by increasing thecapability of their wor kforce

q ensur e that softwa re developm ent capability is an attribu te of theorganization rather th an of a few individua ls

q align th e motivation of ind ivid uals w ith that of the organ ization

q retain hu ma n assets (i.e., peop le with critical knowled ge an d skills)w ithin the organization

The P-CMM describes an evolutionary improvem ent pa th from ad hoc,inconsistently p erformed pra ctices, to a m ature, d isciplined, an dcontinu ously improv ing d evelopm ent of the know ledge, skills, and

motivation of the wor kforce. The P-CMM helps softwa re organizationsq characterize the matu rity of their workforce practices

q guid e a program of continuou s workforce development

q set pr iorities for imm ediate actions

q integrate workforce developm ent w ith process imp rovement

q establish a cultur e of software en gineering excellence

The P-CMM is designed to gu ide software organization s in selecting

immed iate improv ement actions based on th e curr ent matu rity of theirworkforce p ractices. The benefit of the P-CMM is in nar row ing the scopeof imp rovem ent activities to those practices that p rovid e the nextfound ational layer for an organization’s continu ed w orkforce

xiv n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01



Executive Overview

developm ent. These practices have been chosen from ind ustrialexperience as those that have significant imp act on individ ua l, team , u nit,and organ izational performan ce. The P-CMM includ es practices in suchareas as

q work environment

q communicat ion

q staffing

q managing performance

q training

q compensation

q competency developmentq career developmen t

q team bu ilding

q culture d evelopm ent

Structure of the P-CMM

As organizations establish an d imp rove their people managem entpr actices, they p rogress throu gh five levels of ma tu rity. Figu re EO.2d epicts these five levels, each of wh ich p rovides a layer in the foun d ationfor the continu ous imp rovem ent of an orga nization’ s workforce practices.Each m atur ity level is comp osed of several key process areas (KPA) thatiden tify clusters of related workforce p ractices. When p erformedcollectively, the p ractices of a key pr ocess area achieve a set of goalsconsid ered im portan t for enhan cing w orkforce capability.

Achieving each m atu rity level in the P-CMM institu tionalizes new

capabilities as a result of an organ izational imp rovem ent p rogram ,resulting in an overall increase in the w orkforce capability of theorganization. Growth throu gh the matu rity levels creates fund amentalchanges in how people are managed and the culture in which they work.

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capab ility Maturity Mod el n xv



Executive Overview

Level 2—Repeatable

CompensationTraining

Performance ManagementStaffing

CommunicationWork Environment

Level 1—Initial

Level 3—Defined

Participatory CultureCompetency-Based Practices

Career DevelopmentCompetency Development

Workforce PlanningKnowledge and Skills Analysis

Level 4—Managed

Organizational Performance AlignmentOrganizational Competency Management

Team-Based PracticesTeam Building

Mentoring

Level 5—Optimizing

Continuous Workforce InnovationCoaching

Personal Competency Development

Instill basicdisciplineintoworkforceactivities

Identify primarycompetenciesand alignworkforceactivitieswith them

Quantitatively manageorganizational growthin workforcecapabilities andestablish

competency-based teams

Continuously improvemethods for developingpersonal andorganizationalcompetence

Fi g u r e EO .2 T h e Fi v e M a t u r i t y Le v e l s o f t h e P -CM M

xv i n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01



Executive Overview

In matu ring from th e Initial to the Repeata ble level, the orga nizationinstalls the d iscipline of performing basic practices for man aging itswork force. In matu ring to the Defined level, these practices are tailored toenha nce the particular know ledge, skills, and w ork method s that bestsup port th e organization’ s business. The core competencies of theorganization are iden tified, and work force activities are aligned to sup portthe developmen t of these comp etencies. In maturing to the Managedlevel, the organ ization u ses data to ev aluate h ow effective its workforcepr ocesses are and to redu ce variation in their execution. The organizationqu antitatively m anag es organizational growth in work force capabilitiesand , wh en app ropriate, establishes comp etency-based teams. In maturingto the Op timizing level, the orga nization looks continu ally for innov ative

w ays to imp rove its overall talent. The organization is actively involvedin applying and continuou sly improving method s for developingindividu al and organ izational comp etence.

A num ber of imp rovem ent themes cour se throu gh the P-CMM. Thesethemes help organize an un derstand ing of the structure of the model andthe relationship s among th e key process areas within the P-CMM. Asshown in Figure EO.3, the key p rocess areas are mapp ed to four processcategories. The fou r them es of these pr ocess categories are

q developing capabilities

q building teams and culture

q motivating and managing p erformance

q shap ing the workforce

The P-CMM has been designed to be coupled with a CMM-based softwareprocess imp rovement program . How ever, it can be used on its own togu ide imp rovem ents in the workforce pr actices of an organ ization. TheP-CMM can be u sed to gu ide an assessment of the w orkforce practices of anorgan ization, and the SEI is piloting an assessment meth od . H ow ever, the

use of the P-CMM should been d one in conjun ction w ith those in anorganization w ho h ave expertise in wor kforce pr actices.

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capab ility Maturity Mod el n xvii



Executive Overview

Developingcapabilities

Buildingteams and

culture

5Optimizing

4Managed

3Defined

2Repeatable

1

Initial

WorkforcePlanning

Training

ParticipatoryCulture

CareerDevelopment

Competency-Based

Practices

MentoringOrganizationalCompetencyManagement

Knowledgeand SkillsAnalysis

CompetencyDevelopment

Communication Staffing

Compensation

PerformanceManagement

WorkEnvironment

Process Categories

MaturityLevels

Motivatingand managingperformance

Shapingthe workforce

TeamBuilding

Team-BasedPractices

OrganizationalPerformance

Alignment

PersonalCompetencyDevelopment

Coaching

Continuous Workforce Innovation

Communication

Fi gu r e EO .3 T h e Ke y P r o c e s s Ar e a s As s ig n e d t o

Pr o c e s s Ca t e g o r i e s

xviii n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01



1 Introduction

1.1 Motivation for Improving SoftwareDevelopm ent Talent

“The most important ingredient on this su ccessful project was

having smart people...Very little else matters in my

opinion...The most important thing you do for a project is

selectin g t he staff...Really the su ccess of t he software

development organiz ation is v ery, very mu ch associated w ith

its ability to recruit good people.”

“The only rule I have in m anagement is t o ensu re that I have

good people–real good people–and that I grow good people, and

that I provide an environment where good people can

produce.”

Two software vice presidents qu oted in [Curtis88]

“The cent ral quest ion in how t o improve the softw are art

centers, as it always has, on people.”

[Brooks87]

“Personn el att ributes and hum an resource activ ities provide by

far t he largest source of opportu nit y for improvin g softw are

development productivit y.”

[Boehm81]

Knowledge is the raw material of softwar e developm ent, and it is softwar eengineers who transform knowledge into software p rodu cts. Althou gh

software tools can help record an d m anage kn owledge, they do n ot createand app ly it. The level of talent on a software p roject is often the strongestpr ed ictor of its results [Boehm 81], and p ersonn el shortfalls are on e of themost severe p roject risks [Boehm 88]. Therefore, imp roving technology

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capab ility Maturity Mod el n 1



Introduction

and process alone is not enough in the most know ledge-intense ind ustryin history. Imp roving a softwa re organization requ ires continua limprovem ent of its people and of the conditions that empow er theirperformance.

Software development is large-scale, integrated, intellectual work [Hum ph rey89]. The skill of developing software is the skill of manag ingintellectual comp lexity. Performance ranges am ong p rofessional softwa reeng ineer s rou tinely exceed 20 to 1 [Curtis81, Sackman68, Valett89].Software en gineers d iffer marked ly in the level of complexity th ey canhand le [Basili83]. The folklore of softwar e engineer ing is replete withremarkable feats by heroes, wizard s, and guru s. Although the p resence of

an extraordinary ind ividu al on a project can hav e d ramatic imp act, thereare not enou gh of these ind ividu als to staff more than a han dful of thepr ojects in most organ izations [Curtis88]. Softwar e organ izations canlamen t these circum stances, or they can take actions to imp rove them .

As the size of softwar e systems continues to grow an ord er of ma gnitud eeach decade, the ind ustry m ust chan ge from a mystique of artisticallycreative individ ua ls to a team-based p rofession tha t emp hasizescontinuou s learning. Accord ingly, softw are organizations mu st becomecenters of excellence that take talented ind ividu als from un iversities and

other sources and d evelop them into motivated and prod uctive softwareengineering teams. Increasing the know ledge, skills, and performa nce of software d evelopers is necessary to

q compete w ith lower priced talent in other countries

q satisfy the exponen tial explosion in the am oun t and comp lexity of software required by m ost curren t and futu re prod ucts

q increase the qu ality and reliability of software system s to levelsachieved by hard ware, especially in life- and bu siness-criticalapplications

To motivate continu ous imp rovem ent of the workforce, the organ izationmu st perceive its people as assets rather than as expen se items. Whenmem bers of the w orkforce are essentially interchang eable, organizations

2 n People Capab ility Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01



Introduction

focus m ore on m anag ing w orkforce costs than on increasing wor kforceperforman ce. It is tragic wh en this old labor relations m od el is carriedover into high technology, becau se it wa s based on jobs that w ere never asknow led ge intense as those in software d evelopm ent. With the level of performa nce differences cited for softwa re engineers, ind ividu al and teamskills become strateg ic competitive assets.

The benefit of better workforce practices has been d emon stratedemp irically in n um erous stud ies [Labor93, Mavrinac95]. Comp anies withthe best workforce practices hav e been show n to ou tperform oth er firmsin grow th of profits, sales, earn ings, and d ividend s [Hansen 89, Kravetz88].These practices are usu ally consider ed to be integra l to a total qu ality

ma nagem ent (TQM) program , and are includ ed as criteria in the MalcolmBaldridg e National Qua lity Awa rd [Comm erce95]. Nev ertheless, mostsoftware organ izations hav e moved slowly on im proving th eir workforcepractices.

With the help of the Capability Matur ity ModelSM for Softw are (CMMSM)[Paulk95], man y organ izations hav e m ade improvem ents in their softwareprocesses and p ractices. These improvem ents have resulted in improvedpr od uctivity, qu ality, and time to market [Herbsleb94]. Even so, many of these organizations have discovered tha t their continu ed imp rovemen t

requires significant chan ges in the w ay they m anage p eople, chan ges thatare not fully accoun ted for in the CMM for Software. To date, mostimprovem ent program s for software organ izations have emp hasizedpr ocess or technology, not peop le.

Despite the imp ortance of talent, hu man resources and other w orkforcepra ctices in man y organ izations are often ad h oc and inconsistent, andsoftwa re man agers are insu fficiently trained in p erforming them .Consequently, managers often expect their hu man resources dep artmentsto be resp onsible for the a dm inistration of most p eople-related pra ctices.

Comp oun d ing the problem, these practices are often ap plied w ith littleanalysis of their imp act. In man y cases, even w hen software organizations

SM Capa bility Matu rity Model and CMM are service mar ks of Carnegie Mellon University.




Introduction

are aw are of the p roblem and w ant to includ e peop le-related activities intheir imp rovement p rograms, they don’t know w here or how to begin.

1.2 A Maturity Framework for DevelopingHu man Talent

1.2.1 P-CM M O b ject i ve s

The People Capability Matu rity ModelSM (P-CMM SM) focuses oncontinu ously developing the h um an assets of a software or informationsystems organ ization. The P-CMM pr ovides guida nce on how to developan org anization w hose p ractices continuou sly imp rove the cap ability of itswo rkforce. The motivation for the P-CMM is to rad ically imp rove theability of software organizat ions to attract, develop, motivate, organize,and retain th e talent n eeded to steadily imp rove their softwaredev elopm ent capability.

The strateg ic objectives of th e P-CMM ar e to

q imp rove the capability of softwar e organ izations by increasing thecapability of their wor kforce

q ensur e that softwa re developm ent capability is an attribu te of theorganization rather th an of a few individua ls

q align th e motivation of ind ivid uals w ith that of the organ ization

q retain hu ma n assets (i.e., peop le with critical knowled ge an d skills)w ithin the organization

1.2.2 Th e M at u r i t y Fram ew or k

The P-CMM is a ma turity framew ork, patterned after the structure of theCapa bility Matu rity Mod el for Software (CMM), that d escribes the key




Introduction

elemen ts of man aging and d eveloping an organization’s w orkforce. Itdescribes an evolutionary improvem ent p ath from ad hoc, inconsistentlyperformed pr actices, to a matu re, d isciplined d evelopmen t of theknow ledge, skills, and motivation of the w orkforce, just a s the CMMd escribes an evolutionar y impr ovem ent path for the softwa re processeswithin an organ ization. The P-CMM helps softw are organizations

q characterize the matu rity of their workforce practices

q guid e a program of continuou s workforce development

q set pr iorities for imm ediate actions

q integrate workforce developm ent w ith process imp rovement

q establish a cultur e of software en gineering excellence

The P-CMM is designed to gu ide software organ izations in selecting high-priority imp rovement a ctions based on the current m aturity of theirworkforce p ractices. The benefit of the P-CMM is in nar row ing the scopeof imp rovem ent activities to those practices that p rovid e the nextfound ational layer for developing an organization’s workforce. Byconcentrating on a focused set of pr actices and working agg ressively toinstall them , organizations can stead ily imp rove their wor kforce andmake lasting gains in their performance and competitiveness.

The P-CMM gu ides an organization th roug h a series of increasinglysoph isticated p ractices and activities for dev eloping its workforce. Thesepr actices hav e been chosen from ind u strial experience as those that h avesignificant imp act on ind ividu al, team, u nit, and organizationalper formance. The P-CMM includ es pr actices in such areas as

q work environment

q communicat ion

q staffing

q managing performance

q trainingq compensation

q competency development




Introduction

software p rocess by Ron Rad ice and his colleagues w orking u nd er thed irection of H um phrey at IBM [Radice85].

Hu mp hrey brou ght these concepts to the Software Engineering Institute(SEI) in 1986. In 1986 the SEI received a request from the U.S. Air Force todevelop a m ethod for assessing the capability of its softwa re contractors.With assistance from Mitre, the SEI elaborated the p rocess m atur ityfram ework [Hum ph rey88] and d eveloped a questionnaire [Hu mp hrey87]to aid in app raising ma turity. The SEI intend ed the matu rityqu estionn aire to provide a simp le tool for id entifying areas wh ere anorganization’s softwa re process need ed imp rovem ent. In particular, it wasdesigned to collect some initial data to gu ide the in-dep th interviews

du ring a softwa re process assessmen t. Unfortun ately, the matu rityqu estionn aire was too often regard ed as “the m odel” rather than as avehicle for exploring p rocess m atur ity issues.

The original form ulation for the stru cture of the CMM in its curren t formwas presented by Hu mp hrey in Managing t he Softw are Process

[Hu mp hrey89]. Through software process assessments, workshop s, andextensive review, the SEI evolved the software p rocess ma tur ityframework into the Cap ability Maturity Mod el for Softwar e (CMM)[Paulk95]. Version 1 was released for nation al review in Augu st 1991, and

the r evised Version 1.1 [Pau lk93a, 93b] was released in January 1993.

The CMM is widely used for guid ing softwa re process impr ovemen tprogram s both in the U.S. and abroad . Although originally ad opted byaerospace firms, the CMM is now used in commercial software andinformation systems organizations. The CMM has been used su ccessfullyto impro ve softwa re performa nce in comp anies such as Citicorp , Corning,GTE, Grumman, Hewlett-Packard, Hughes Aircraft, IBM, Motorola,Procase Corp ., Raytheon , Rockwell, Schlum berger , and the U.S. Air Force[Billings94, Dion93, Goldenson95, Grady92, Herbsleb94, Humphrey91,

Johnson94a, Johnson94b, Lipke92, Nid iffer95, Paulk95, Selfridge94,Sud low94, Wohlw end 93]. Recent emp irical results point to an averagereturn on investment in software p rocess improvem ent of $5.70 saved forevery $1 spent [Herbsleb94].




Introduction

1. 2. 2.2 P r i n ci p l e s U n d e r l y i n g t h e Ma t u r i t y Fr am ew o r k

A fun dam ental premise un derlying the maturity framew ork is that apractice cannot be impr oved if it cann ot be repeated . In an organ ization’sleast matu re state, systematic and repeated p erforman ce of practices is onlyspor ad ic. The Repeatab le level of the CMM (Level 2) is prima rily focusedon helping software organizations remove th e imped iments that keepthem from repeating su ccessful software developm ent or m aintenancepractices. The most comm on imp ediments are sched ule or resourcecomm itments that the software staff could n ot meet regard less of howsoph isticated their skills or processes are. Anoth er particularly wickedimped iment is un controlled requirements changes that devastate theoriginal p lanning.

In a ru sh to satisfy un reasonable objectives, the p roject staff begin cuttingcorners on sou nd engineering practices and making m istakes that are notcaught u nti l i t is mu ch more t ime consuming and expensive to removethem . As a result, p rojects lose control of their sched u le, costs, andprod uct quality. When sou nd practices are sacrificed to sched ule or otherconstraints, engineers have little chan ce to imp rove their per forman ce orfollow throu gh effectively on innova tive id eas. The prima ry objective atthe Repeata ble level is to instill a process discipline in th e environ men t

that ensu res that the basic practices need ed to stabilize the environ men tare performed on a regular and repeatable basis.

Hav ing established an ability to make an d protect achievablecomm itments, the organ ization can focus on tran sferring its bestdevelopm ent or m aintenance practices across the organization. Althoughsuccessful p ractices are executed repeatab ly at the Repeatable m atu ritylevel, they m ay be p erformed quite d ifferently by d ifferent p eople or indifferent grou ps. Some w ays of performing th ese practices w ill provemo re effective than oth ers.

Capitalizing on processes that work best is the heart of the Defined level(Level 3). The organ ization iden tifies the d esign, testing , inspection,




Introduction

ma nag emen t, configu ration control, and other p rocesses that seem tohav e worked best on different p rojects, and integra tes them into anorganization-wide p rocess for d evelopmen t. This pr ocess is trainedthrou ghou t the organization so that people have a comm on reference forperforming their work. In using d efined organization-wide processes,ma nagers a nd technical staff benefit from lessons learned on ear lierprojects and do not h ave to reinvent successful m ethods.

Once the organization can execute its developm ent p rocesses consistently,it can u se its pr ocess data to systema tically eliminate th e causes of w idevariations in its p erforman ce. The objective of the Man aged level (Level4) is to set quan titative performan ce and quality targets and r edu ce the

var iation in pr ocess to stabilize the organ ization’s capa bility in achievingthese targets. During this attemp t to redu ce performan ce variation,statistical pr ocess control principles can be app lied . How ever, theirap plication, and even th e relevant statistical meth od s, ma y d iffer fromthose used in manu facturing. Manag ers now u se these detailed processdata as their primary m anagemen t tool.

At the O ptim izing level (Level 5), the org anization continu es on itsimprovement p ath w ith a focus on continuous p rocess imp rovement.The organization begins to id entify technology and pr ocess inn ovations

that can continually imp rove its performan ce and competitive p osture.Cau ses of defects are systematically eliminated . The organization focuseson continu al imp rovem ent of any factor tha t affects the achievem ent of itsbusiness goals.

The CMM gu ides organ izations in stead ily imp roving th eir cap ability fordev eloping software. The cap ability of an organ ization to d evelopsoftwa re is the ran ge of results it ord inarily experiences when executingprojects. Capa bility is imp roved b y establishing a learning env ironmen twh ere the organization ha s quan titative feedb ack on its perform ance. In

the abstract, the m aturity framework bu ild s an environm ent in wh ichq practices can be rep eated

q best practices can be rap idly transferred across group s




Introduction

q variations in performing best practices are red uced

q pr actices are continuou sly imp roved to enha nce cap ability

This ma turity framework sh ould be app lied on ly to practices thatcontribute directly to the business performance of an organ ization. Theseare the p ractices that increase the organization ’s cap ability to prov ide high -qu ality prod ucts and services efficiently. Since the kn owledge, skills, andmotivation of an organ ization’s softwa re dev elopm ent talent are crucial toits perform ance, the practices for ma naging th eir developm ent areexcellent cand idates for imp rovement u sing th e matu rity framework.Thus, the P-CMM seeks to increase the capability of the workforce in th esame w ay th at the CMM increased the capability of the organ ization’ssoftware process.

1.2.3 A Fam i ly of M a tu r i ty M o d els

In laying a strategy for imp roving th e p ractice of softwa re engineering, theSEI focused on imp rovem ents in three areas. As dep icted in Figure 1.1,these three areas—people, process, and techn ology—are the p rimarysources of leverage for imp roving th e softw are engineering p ractice of an

organization and its resulting p rod ucts. The SEI has been condu ctingpr ogram s in each of these area s since the m id-1980s.

Figure 1.1 Three Compon ents of Imp rovemen t Focus




Introduction

The efforts of the SEI in softwa re pr ocess have centered arou nd using th eCMM for Softwa re as a gu ide for improv ing an organization’s softwar eprocess. The SEI has sup plemented the use of the CMM in imp rovementprograms by p roviding m ethods for

q ap praising the a ctual practice of software engineering in organ izations

q d efining and representing software p rocesses

q using qu antitative method s for process managem ent andimprovement

q imp roving each d eveloper’s personal softwa re process

The success of the CMM for Softwar e generated an interest in ap plyingma tur ity principles to other activities within an organ ization. The SEI isnow exploring the ap plication of matu rity principles to each corner of thetriangle in Figu re 1.1. An obvious ap plication of the matu rity fram ewor k is to raise its app lication from th e softw are comp onen t up to the level of systems engineering. The SEI has coordinated th e developm ent of aSystem s Eng ineering Capability Matu rity Mod el (SE-CMM) [Bate94]. Thismod el translates the CMM to term s and processes that are relevant to theentire systems engineering p rocess on a p roject.

As many defense contractors began to matu re their developm ent

pr ocesses, the DoD rea lized that th eir acquisition p ractices were becominga major imp ediment to further gains in prod uctivity and q uality.Accord ingly, DoD has begu n th e develop men t of an System AcquisitionCapa bility Maturity Mod el (SA-CMM) to gu ide imp rovemen ts in DoDacqu isition pr actices. The combina tion of the CMM, SE-CMM, andSA-CMM should dramatically increase the effectiveness of the contractor-acqu isition office partn ership for delivering defense system s. Thesemod els w ill be just as ben eficial in commercial ind ustry as they ar e in theaerospace ind ustry.

The SEI has also tentatively explored the ap plication of m atur ity principlesto softwar e techn ology. The objective of such a m od el w ould be toevaluate software technologies on a continuu m that stretches from ad hocinconsistent m ethod s to consistently performed , quan titatively-based




Introduction

method s. Thus, software wou ld be d esigned u sing method s that yield aqu antitative char acterization of the results of design d ecisions. The initialformu lations of this mod el are prom ising, bu t it is still u nd er exploration.

The P-CMM was d eveloped to app ly matur ity principles to thedev elopmen t of the work force. In app lying these principles, w e areimplying th at the d evelopmen t of the workforce is a process with p racticesthat can be imp roved. Further we are implying that p rinciples that havebeen trad itionally used for the improv emen t of a prod uct can also beapp lied to the improvem ent of peop le. Thus, the P-CMM rests on thepremise that people have skills that can be m easured an d thatorgan izations can continu ously imp rove their processes for d eveloping

and organ izing th ese skills.

The P-CMM is the found ation for systematically building a set of tools,includ ing an assessment m ethod, wh ich are useful in u nd erstanding anorgan ization’s baseline capabilities to develop its workforce and incharting imp rovem ents in an organ ization’s workforce practices.Althou gh th e P-CMM has been d eveloped with the needs of the softwareengineering and information systems comm un ity in mind , the keypractices for d eveloping th e w orkforce can be app lied to almost anyknow ledge-intense job. In fact, most of these pr actices will app ly to jobs

through out an organ ization. We use software examp les frequentlythrou ghou t the P-CMM, but th is d oes not imply that th ese practices can beapp lied on ly to people directly involved w ith software. It may be p ossiblefor an organization to use the P-CMM and associated assessmen tinstrumen ts to add ress its capa bility for d eveloping peop le in areas ou tsid eof software, and to integrate the resulting action plans into an overall planfor revitalizing the organ ization.




2 Maturity Levels of thePeople CMM

2.1 Definition of the P-CMM Maturity Levels

As a capability m aturity m odel, the P-CMM gu ides organizations inestablishing and imp roving their wo rkforce practices throug h fiveevolutiona ry stages. Achieving each ma tur ity level in the P-CMMinstitutionalizes new capabilities for developing the kn owled ge and skillsof the wor kforce, resulting in an overall increase in th e talent of theorganization. Growth throu gh the matu rity levels creates fund amentalchanges in how people are developed and organized and in their workingculture.

Figu re 2.1 dep icts the five matu rity levels of the P-CMM. Each matu ritylevel pr ovides a layer in the foun da tion for continu ous imp rovem ent of an orga nization’s workforce practices. In matu ring from the Initial to theRepeatable level, the organ ization installs the d iscipline of performing th ebasic pr actices. In matu ring to the Defined level, these pr actices are

tailored to enh ance the particular know ledge, skills, and wor k metho dsthat best sup port the organ ization’s business. In matur ing to the Managedlevel, the organization d evelops competen cy-based, high-performa nceteam s and emp irically evaluates how effectively its workforce practices aremeeting objectives. In matu ring to the Op timizing level, the organ izationlooks continu ally for innovative w ays to imp rove its work force capabilityand to sup po rt individ ua ls in their pu rsuit of pro fessional excellence.

2.1.1 Le ve l 1 - T h e In i ti al Le ve l

At th e Initial level, the p erforman ce of work force activities is inconsistent.The organ ization typically p rovides forms for activities such asperforman ce app raisals or position requisitions, bu t offers little guid ance




Matu rity Levels of the Peop le CMM

or training in condu cting th e activities supp orted by th ese forms.Typically m anagers hav e not been trained in p erforming m ost of theirwork force respon sibilities, so their ability to m anage those w ho r eport tothem is based on pr evious experience and their persona l “peop le skills.”These organizations are not necessarily abusive or inconsiderate. Theirproblem is that th ey d o not h ave the ability to systematically d evelop thecomp etitive cap ability of their work force.

Initial(1)

Repeatable(2)

Defined(3)

Managed(4)

Optimizing(5)

Instill basicdiscipline intoworkforceactivities

Identify primary competenciesand align workforce activitieswith them

Quantitatively manage organizationalgrowth in workforce capabilities andestablish competency-based teams

Continuously improve methods fordeveloping personal and

organizational competence

Fi g u r e 2 . 1 T h e Fi v e M a t u r i t y Le v e l s o f t h e P- CM M




Matu rity Levels of the People CM M

In the w orst circum stances, ma nagers in Level 1 organ izations do n otaccept d eveloping the m embers of their unit as a p rimary personalrespon sibility. They perform wor kforce activities such as interviewing jobcandid ates or cond ucting performan ce appra isals with little prep aration,often resulting in poor staffing decisions or disgrun tled emp loyees. Thehu man resources departm ent too often imports p ractices and app lies themwith little analysis of their effectiveness. Individ ua ls in m ost Level 1organizations do not take work force practices seriously, since they d o n otbelieve the p ractices have m u ch relation to their real work an d level of contribution to the organization.

The wor kforce capability of a Level 1 organ ization is u nkn ow n, since there

is little effort to measu re or imp rove it. Individ u als are motivated topu rsue their ow n agen d as, since there are few incentives in p lace to aligntheir mo tivations with th e business objectives of the orga nization .Turnover is high w hen peop le feel there are better working cond itions orgrow th poten tial in another organization. Consequ ently, the level of know ledge and skills available in the organization d oes not grow overtime because of the need to replace experienced an d know ledg eableindividu als wh o have left the organization.

2.1.2 Le ve l 2 - T h e R ep e at ab l e Le ve l

The prim ary objectives at the Repeatable level are to eliminate p roblemsthat keep peop le from b eing able to perform their w ork respon sibilitieseffectively and to establish a found ation of work force pr actices that can becontinu ously imp roved in developing the workforce. The most frequen tproblems th at keep peop le from being able to perform effectively in low-matu rity organizations includ e

q environmental distractions

q u nclear perform ance objectives

q lack of relevan t know ledge or skill

q poor comm un ication





In ma turing to the Repeatab le level, an organ ization establishes policiesthat comm it it to develop ing its peop le. A prim ary objective in achievinga rep eatable capability is to establish a sense of responsibility and d isciplinein performing basic workforce p ractices. These pr actices ensu re that thepeople in each un it will have the kn owledge and skills required toperform their curren t assignment. When these practices areinstitutionalized, the organization has laid a foun d ation on wh ich it canbuild improved method s and practices.

At the Repeatab le level, those w ho h ave been assigned respon sibility forperforming wor kforce activities accept personal responsibility for ensu ringtha t all workforce pr actices are imp lemen ted effectively. In doing so, they

accept the grow th and developm ent of their staff as a primaryrespon sibility of their position. When p eople take their workforceresponsibilities seriously, they begin to dev elop repeatable m ethod s forperforming specific activities such as interview ing or establishingperforma nce criteria. Individu als will notice greater consistency in th eperformance of workforce functions w ithin their group , althoughdifferent man agers or group s may h ave individu al variations in thespecific method s they use.

The effort to implem ent imp roved wo rkforce practices begins w hen

executive manag ement comm its the organization to constantly impr ovethe know ledge, skills, motivation, and per forman ce of its wo rkforce. Theorgan ization states that th e continuou s developm ent of its workforce is acore value. The organization docum ents policies and d evelops basicwo rkforce pr actices that the un its will imp lement. Units d evelop plansfor satisfying their wor kforce need s and resp onsibilities. These initialneeds ar e in the areas of the work environm ent, comm un ication, staffing,performance managem ent, training, and comp ensation. Until these basicwor kforce pr actices become institutionalized, the org anization w ill haved ifficulty adopting m ore soph isticated w orkforce pr actices.





2.1.3 Le ve l 3 - T h e D e fi n ed Le ve l

Organ izations at the Repeatable level find th at although they areper forming ba sic w orkforce practices, ther e is inconsistency in how t hesepr actices are perform ed across un its. The organization is not capitalizingon op portunities to stand ard ize its best workforce pr actices, becau se it hasnot identified the common know ledge and skills needed across its un itsand the best practices to be used for developing them. The organization ismotivated to achieve the Defined level in ord er to gain a strategiccomp etitive ad van tage from its core comp etencies.

At the Defined level, the organization begins to ad ap t its workforcepr actices to the sp ecific natu re of its bu siness. By an alyzing th e skillsrequired by its workforce and the bu siness fun ctions they p erform, theorganization id entifies the core competen cies required to perform itsbusiness. The organization then ad apts its workforce practices to developthe sp ecific know ledge an d skills that comp ose these core competencies.The organ ization id entifies best p ractices in its ow n w orkforce activities orthose of other organ izations and tailors them a s the basis for ad apting itsworkforce practices.

The organization an alyzes its business processes to d etermine the corecomp etencies involved in its work and the know ledge and skills thatconstitute these comp etencies. The organization then dev elops strategicand near-term p lans for d eveloping these competen cies across theorganization. A progra m is defined for systematically d eveloping corecompeten cies, and ind ivid ua ls’ career developm ent strategies are plann edto sup port competency developm ent for each individu al. Theorganization ad ministers its workforce practices to develop and rewardgrowth in its core comp etencies and to app ly them to improveperformance.

A comm on organ izational culture can d evelop at the Defined level,because the organization becomes focused on d eveloping and r eward ing aset of core comp etencies. This culture p laces imp ortance on grow ing the





organ ization’s cap ability in its core competencies, and th e entire wor kforcebegins sharing respon sibility for this grow th. Such a cultur e is reinforcedwh en workforce practices are adapted to encourage and reward growth inthe organ ization’s core competencies. This culture can be enh anced byestablishing a p articipatory environment w here individuals and group sare involved in d ecisions regarding their w ork.

The wor kforce capab ility of organ izations at the Defined level is based onhaving a w orkforce that p ossesses the basic knowledge a nd skills toperform the core bu siness functions of the organization. Knowled ge andskills in the orga nization’s core competen cies are m ore evenly sp readacross the organization. The organization has imp roved its ability to

pred ict the perform ance of its wor k activities based on kn owing th e levelof knowledge an d skills ava ilable in its work force. Also, it has establisheda foun da tion on which continu ous d evelopm ent of know ledge and skillscan be bu ilt.

2.1.4 Le ve l 4 - T h e M a n ag ed Le ve l

Organ izations at the Defined level have established the foun d ation forcontinu ously imp roving their workforce. At the Managed level, theorganization takes th e first steps in cap italizing on man aging its corecomp etencies as a strategic ad van tage. It sets quan titative objectives forgrow th in core comp etencies and for the alignmen t of perform ance acrossthe individu al, team, unit, and organ izational levels. These measu resestablish th e qu antitative found ation for evaluating trend s in thecapability of the organ ization’s workforce. Furth er, it seeks to maximizethe effectiveness of ap plying th ese comp etencies by d eveloping team s thatintegrate comp lementary know ledge and skills.

At the Managed level, high-perform ance teams comp osed of people with

comp lementary kn owledge and skills are developed w here conditionssup po rt their fun ctioning. Team-building activities are performed toimp rove the effectiveness of these teams. When ap p lied to teams,





work force practices are tailored to supp ort team dev elopmen t andperformance.

Mentors are mad e available to both ind ividu als and teams. Mentors usetheir experience to provide p ersonal supp ort, guidan ce, and some skilldevelopm ent. Mentors also provide another way to retain andd isseminate lessons learned across the organ ization.

Organ izational grow th in each of the organization’s core competen cies isqu antitatively ma nag ed. Data on the level of core comp etencies in theorganization are analyzed to determ ine trend s and capability. These

comp etency trends are then used to evaluate the effectiveness of comp etency-related workforce pr actices. In ad d ition, performan ce d ata arecollected an d an alyzed for trends in the alignmen t of perform ance at theindividu al, team, unit, and organ izational levels. Trends in thealignm ent of performan ce are used to eva luate the effectiveness of perform ance-related w orkforce pr actices. These trend s are tracked againstthe objectives set in th e strategic and near-term w orkforce p lans.

The workforce cap ability of Level 4 organ izations is pred ictable because th ecurrent capability of the w orkforce is know n qu antitatively. The

organ ization ha s also developed a mechan ism for dep loying itscompetencies effectively th roug h high-performan ce, comp etency-basedteams. Future trend s in w orkforce cap ability and performan ce can bepr ed icted becau se the cap ability of the w orkforce pr actices to impr ove theknow ledge and skills of the w orkforce is know n qu antitatively. This levelof wor kforce capa bility provides the organ ization w ith an imp ortantpr edictor of trend s in its business cap ability.

2.1.5 Le ve l 5 - T h e O p t im i zin g Le ve l

At the Op timizing level, there is a continu ous focus on imp rovingindividu al comp etencies and find ing inn ovative ways to imp rovewor kforce motivation and capability. The organ ization sup ports





individu als’ effort toward continu ous d evelopm ent of personalcomp etencies. Coaches are provided to sup port further development of person al or team comp etencies.

Data on the effectiveness of work force pra ctices are u sed to id entify needsfor inn ovative w orkforce pr actices or technologies. Innova tive practicesand technologies are evaluated and the most p romising are u sed inexploratory trials. Successful innovations ar e then transferred into u sethroughou t the organization.

The w orkforce capability of Op timizing organizations is continuou sly

improving because they are perpetu ally imp roving their workforcepr actices. Imp rovem ent occurs both by incremen tal ad van cements intheir existing workforce practices and by ad option of innov ative practicesand method s that may have a dram atic impact. The culture created in anOp timizing organ ization is one in wh ich all member s of the w orkforce arestriving to imp rove their ow n, their team’s, and their un it’s know ledge,skills, and motivation in ord er to imp rove the organization’s overallperforman ce. The workforce practices are honed to create a culture of performance excellence.

2.2 The Key Process Areas of the P-CMM

Figu re 2.2 displays th e key p rocess areas for each of the five ma tu rity levelsin the P-CMM. Each key process area (KPA) iden tifies a cluster of relatedactivities that, wh en p erformed collectively, achieve a set of goalsconsidered imp ortan t for enh ancing work force capab ility. Key p rocessareas have been d efined to reside at a single matu rity level.

Key process areas identify the capabilities that m ust be institutionalized toachieve a matu rity level. They describe the p ractices that an organizationshou ld imp lement to impr ove its workforce capability.





Initial (1)

Repeatable (2)

Compensation

Training

Performance Management

Staffing

Defined (3)

Peer reviews

Competency-Based Practices

Competency Development

Knowledge and Skills Analysis

Workforce Planning

Managed (4)

Coaching

Optimizing (5)

Organizational Performance Alignment

Organizational Competency Management

Participatory Culture

Mentoring

Work Environment


Team Building

Team-Based Practices

Career Development


Communication

Figure 2.2 The Key Process Areas of the P-CMM

by M aturity Level





2.2.1 K ey Pr oce ss Ar ea s a t t h e Re p e at ab l e Le ve l

The key p rocess areas at the Repea table level focus on establishing basicwor kforce practices and eliminating problem s that hind er work per forman ce. Descriptions of each of the six key process areas at Level 2are presented below:

q Work Environmen t is d esigned to establish and ma intain workingcond itions that allow ind ividu als to concentrate on their taskswithou t un necessary or inap pro priate distractions. Work Environment involves ensuring that an app ropriate work

environm ent exists, that the w ork environm ent comp lies with allapp licable laws an d regulations, that imp rovements are mad e thatwill enhan ce performan ce, that imp edimen ts to performance areremoved , and th at distractions are minimized.

q Communication is designed to establish a social environm ent tha tsup ports effective interaction and to ensure th at the w orkforce hasthe skills to share informa tion and coordina te their activitiesefficiently. Com mu nication inv olves establishing effective top-d ow nand bottom-up commu nication mechanisms within theorganization, and ensuring th at all ind ividu als have the n ecessary

comm un ications skills to p erform th eir tasks, coord inate effectively,condu ct meetings efficiently, and resolve p roblems.

q Staffing is designed to establish an d u se a form al process by whichtalent is recruited, selected , and tr ansitioned into assignm ents in theorgan ization. Recru iting invo lves iden tifying the know ledge andskill requirements for open positions, motivating all individuals toseek out q ua lified candid ates, annou ncing the a vailability of positionsto likely sources of cand ida tes, and rev iewing th e effectiveness of recru iting efforts. Selection invo lves developin g a list of qu alified

cand idates, defining a selection strategy, iden tifying qua lifiedcandida tes, thorou ghly evaluating qu alified cand idates, and selectingthe m ost qua lified cand idate. Tran sitioning inv olves attracting





selected cand idates, orienting them to the organ ization, and ensu ringtheir successful transition into their new p ositions.

q Performance Man agement is designed to establish objective criteriaagainst which u nit and individual p erforman ce can be measured , toprov ide performan ce feedba ck, and to enhan ce performa ncecontinu ously. Performan ce Managem ent involves establishingobjective criteria for u nit and ind ividu al performa nce, discussingperforman ce regularly and identifying wa ys to enh ance it, prov idingperiod ic feedba ck on performance, identifying d evelopmen t needs,and systematically add ressing performance problems or reward ing

extraordinary performance.

q Training is d esigned to ensu re that all ind ividu als have the skillsrequ ired to p erform their assignm ents. Training involves iden tifyingthe skills required to perform critical tasks, identifying training needswithin each un it, and en suring that n eeded training is received.

q Compensation is d esigned to provid e all ind ivid ua ls w ithremu neration and benefits based on th eir contribution and value to

the organization. Comp ensation includes developing a docum entedcompen sation strategy, developing a plan for adm inisteringcompensation, and m aking periodic adjustmen ts to comp ensationbased on performan ce.

2.2.2 K ey Pr oce ss Ar ea s a t t h e D e fi n ed Le ve l

The key process areas at the Defined level add ress organizational issues, asthe organization ta ilors its d efined workforce practices to the corecompeten cies required by its business environm ent. Descriptions of eachof the six key process areas for Level 3 are given below:





q Knowledge and Skills Analysis is designed to identify the kn owledgeand skills required to p erform core business processes so that theymay be developed and used as a basis for work force practices.Knowled ge an d Skills Analysis inv olves id entifying th e bu sinessprocesses in w hich th e organization mu st maintain competence,dev eloping profiles of the know ledge and skills need ed to p erformthese business fun ctions, maintaining a know ledge and skillsinventory, and identifying future kn owledge an d skill needs.

q Workforce Planning is d esigned to coord inate workforce activitieswith current and futu re business needs at both the organizational and

un it levels. Workforce Plann ing inv olves d evelopin g a strategicwork force p lan th at sets organ ization-wide objectives for comp etencydevelopm ent an d workforce activities, and developing n ear-termplans to gu ide the wor kforce activities of each u nit.

q Competency Developmen t is designed to constantly enh ance thecapability of the w orkforce to perform th eir assigned tasks andrespon sibilities. The core comp etencies id entified in Knowled ge andSkills Analysis and Workforce Plann ing p rovide th e found ation forthe organization’s developm ent and training program. Comp etency

Developmen t involves establishing training and other developm entprog ram s in each of the organization’s core competencies.Developm ent activities are d esigned to raise the level of know ledgeand skill in the org anization’s cur rent an d anticipa ted corecompetencies.

q Career Development is d esigned to ensure that all ind ivid ua ls aremotivated and are provided opp ortunities to develop n ew skills thatenh ance their ability to achieve career objectives. CareerDevelopm ent includ es discussing career options with each

individua l, developing a p ersonal developm ent plan, trackingprogr ess against it, identifying training op portu nities, and mak ingassignm ents tha t enh ance career objectives.





q Comp etency-Based Practices is designed to ensure th at all workforcepractices are based in p art on d eveloping th e know led ge and skills of the work force. Com petency-Based Practices involves recru itingagainst know ledge and skill needs, basing selection method s onassessing th e know ledge an d skills of cand idates, assessing jobperforman ce against the tasks and roles assigned to the p osition, andbasing comp ensation at least in p art on grow th in know ledge an dskills.

q Participatory Cu lture is designed to en sure a flow of inform ationwithin the organ ization, to incorporate the kn owledge of individu als

into decision-mak ing p rocesses, and to gain their sup port forcommitmen ts. Establishing a participatory cultur e lays thefound ation for building high-performan ce teams. ParticipatoryCulture involves establishing effective comm un ications am ong alllevels of the organization, seeking inp ut from ind ividu als, involvingindividu als in making d ecisions and commitmen ts, andcommu nicating d ecisions to them.

2.2.3 K ey Pr oce ss Ar ea s a t t h e M an a ge d Le ve l

The key process areas at the Managed level focus on bu ild ing competency-based teams and establishing a qu antitative u nd erstand ing of trend s in thedevelopm ent of know led ge and skills and in the alignment of performa nce across d ifferent levels of the organ ization. Analyses of thefive key p rocess areas at this level are high ly interd epen dent, as describedbelow:

q Mentoring is designed to u se the experience of the orga nization’sworkforce to provide p ersonal supp ort and guidance to other

individu als or group s. This guidance can involve developingknow ledge and skills, imp roving p erforman ce, han d ling d ifficultsituations, and ma king career d ecisions. Mentoring involves settingobjectives for a mentor ing p rogram , designing m entoring a ctivities to





achieve these objectives, selecting and training ap pr opriate m entors,assigning m entors to individu als or group s, establishing m entoringrelationships, and evalu ating the effectiven ess of the m entorin gprogram.

q Team Building is designed to capitalize on op portu nities to createteams that m aximize the integration of diverse know led ge and skillsto perform bu siness fun ctions. Team Building involves matchingpotential team m embers to the know ledge an d skill requirements of the team , training all new m emb ers in team skills, d efiningobjectives for team performan ce, tailoring stand ard pr ocesses for u se

by the team, and period ically reviewing team p erformance.

q Team-Based Practices is designed to tailor the organ ization’swor kforce practices to sup por t the developm ent, motivation, andfunctioning of team s. Team-Based Pra ctices involves ensurin g thatthe work en vironmen t sup ports team functions, setting p erforman cecriteria and reviewing team performan ce, involving team m embersin p erforming w orkforce activities, and reflecting team criteria inindividu al comp ensation decisions.

q Organizational Comp etency Management is designed to increase thecapability of the organ ization in its core comp etencies and tod etermine th e effectiveness of its comp etency d evelopm ent activitiesin achieving specific competency grow th goals. OrganizationalComp etency Managem ent involves setting measu rable goals forgrow th in th e organization’s core comp etencies, d efining andcollecting d ata relevant to th em, analyzing th e imp act of comp etencydevelopm ent activities on achieving these goals, and using th eresults to guide th e app lication an d improvem ent of comp etencydevelopm ent activities.

q Organ izational Performance Alignmen t is d esigned to enhan cealignm ent of performance results at the individu al, team, un it, and





organizational levels with th e app rop riate goals and to quan titativelyassess the effectiveness of workforce p ractices on achievingalignm ent. Organizational Performa nce Alignmen t involves settingmeasu rable goals for aligning performa nce at the ind ividu al, team,un it, and organ izational levels, d efining the da ta and analyses,collecting the da ta, analyzing trend s against objectives, acting onexceptional find ings, analyzing the impact of peop le-related p racticeson p erforman ce alignment, and reporting results.

2.2.4 K ey Pr oce ss Ar ea s a t t h e O p ti m iz in g Le ve l

The key p rocess areas at th e Op timizing level cover the issues that boththe organization and ind ividu als mu st ad d ress in imp lementingcontinuou s imp rovem ents in their capability. Descriptions of each of thethree key p rocess areas for Level 5 are given below :

q Personal Comp etency Developm ent is designed to p rovide afound ation for professional self d evelopm ent. Personal Comp etencyDevelopm ent consists of a volun tary p rogram for continuou slyimprov ing individu al work p rocesses. This program involves

dev eloping goals and plans for p ersonal work activities, establishingand using d efined p ersonal processes, measu ring and a nalyzing theeffectiveness of these personal p rocesses, and imp lementingimprovements to them.

q Coaching is designed to prov ide expert assistance to enhan ce theperforman ce of individu als or teams. Coaches engag e in closerelationships w ith ind ividu als or teams to guid e developm ent of skills that imp rove perform ance. Coaching involves selectingapp ropriate coaches, analyzing d ata on p ersonal or team p erforma nce,

provid ing guidan ce on method s for improving p erforman ce, andevaluating prog ress towa rd goals for imp roving performan ce.





q Continuous Workforce In novation is designed to identify andevaluate imp roved w orkforce practices and techn ologies, andimplement the m ost promising on es throughou t the organization.Continu ous Workforce Inn ovation involves establishing amechanism for prop osing impr ovemen ts in w orkforce activities,identifying need s for new pra ctices and technologies, surveying an devalua ting innovative p ractices and techno logies, cond uctingexploratory tr ials of new p ractices and technologies, andimp lementing th e most beneficial ones across the organization.

2.3 Th em es in th e P-CM M

By d efinition, key process areas are expressed at a single matu rity level.There are, however, relationships betw een the key p rocess areas thatstretch across matu rity levels. These relationships establish four them esthat run th rough the P-CMM:

q developing capabilities

q building teams and culture

q motivating and managing p erformance

q shap ing the workforce

The key process areas are map ped to the four them es in Figure 2.3. Each of these themes are rep resented as p rocess categories in the figur e, and thefour them es are described in fur ther detail below. These p rocess categorieshelp organ ize an u nd erstand ing of the structure of the P-CMM andrelationships of the key p rocess areas w ithin the P-CMM.

The existence of these them es imp lies that imp rovemen ts in some areasneed not be restricted to a single key process area, bu t can includ e anintegrated set of pr actices from severa l p rocess areas. Furth er, theimp lementation of key pr ocess areas at one level can be seen a sestablishing the ba sis for p ractices and capab ilities at the next level.





Developingcapabilities

Buildingteams and

culture

5Optimizing

4Managed

3Defined

2Repeatable

1Initial

WorkforcePlanning

Training

ParticipatoryCulture

CareerDevelopment

Competency-Based

Practices

MentoringOrganizationalCompetency

Management

Knowledgeand SkillsAnalysis

CompetencyDevelopment

Communication Staffing

Compensation

PerformanceManagement

WorkEnvironment

Process Categories

MaturityLevels

Motivatingand managingperformance

Shapingthe workforce

TeamBuilding

Team-BasedPractices

OrganizationalPerformance

Alignment

PersonalCompetencyDevelopment

Coaching


Communication

Fi gu r e 2 . 3 T h e Ke y P r o c e s s Ar e a s As s ig n e d t o

Pr o c e s s Ca t e g o r i e s

Developing capabilit ies — The effort to dev elop th e capabilities of thepeop le in th e organ ization begins at th e Repeatable level with iden tifyingthe immed iate training need s of peop le in each un it (Training). Oral and

written commu nication capab ilities are imp roved throu gh training(Comm un ication). At the Defined level the organization takes a moresystematic look at the know ledge and skills required to perform theorgan ization’s business processes (Know ledge an d Skills Analysis) and





iden tifies core comp etencies. The organiza tion also establishes anorganization-wide d evelopm ent p rogram for these competencies(Comp etency Developm ent). At the Managed level mentors are providedto guide ind ividu als or teams in their development (Mentoring). Finally,at the Op timizing level, people can initiate an individual p rogram tod evelop their com peten cies (Personal Comp etency Develop men t), andcoaches w ill be provided for those who w ant assistance (Coaching). Thema turity trend in d eveloping the workforce starts w ith id entifying cur renttraining need s within a u nit, gradu ates to the identification of corecomp etencies that are d eveloped by the organization, and then return s toindividu als being able to establish their own p rogram of professionaldevelopment.

Building t eams and cultu re — The effort to imp rove the w ays in w hichpeop le are organized an d interact in the organ ization begins at theRepeatable level with a focus on imp roving both th e formal andinterpersona l comm un ications within the organization(Comm un ication). At the Defined level the organization develops apa rticipatory cultu re by increasing th e involvemen t of the w orkforce indecisions that affect their work (Participator y Cultur e). At the Managedlevel the organ ization begins building high-perform ance, comp etency-based teams and p rovides them with an ap prop riate level of autonom y(Team Bu ild ing). At the Op timizing level the organ ization continu ou slysearches for innovative ways to improv e the culture or the functioning of teams (Continu ous Workforce Inn ovation). The matur ity trend inbuilding team s and culture begins with establishing basic comm un icationskills, grow s to developing a par ticipatory culture, and continues on intoformal team bu ild ing and continu ous imp rovemen t of team capabilities.

M otivatin g and managing performance — The focus on motivation an dperforma nce begins at the Repeatab le level with establishing anenvironment that has ad equate resources and d oes not imp ede or d istractfrom job performan ce (Work Environmen t). Discussions abou t how to

imp rove performa nce are held p eriodically, unacceptable performan ce isman aged, and recognition is provided for outstand ing performance(Performan ce Manag emen t). The basic compen sation and ben efits systemis defined at this level, and its adm inistration is partly tied to p erform ance





(Comp ensation ). At the Defined level the workforce p ractices establishedat the Repeatab le level are ad ap ted to motivate the d evelopm ent of corecomp etencies (Comp etency-Based Practices). The organization alsoestablishes a set of gradu ated career opp ortun ities designed to motivateand rewa rd p eople for developing ad ditional skill (Career Developm ent).At the Man aged level the w orkforce pra ctices are again ad apted , this timefor use with comp etency-based team s (Team-Based Pr actices). Theorganization also sets and tracks targets for the a lignm ent of performan ceat the individu al, team, u nit, and organizational levels (OrganizationalPerforma nce Alignm ent). At the Op timizing level the organ izationsearches for inn ovative w orkforce p ractices and technologies that canfurther motivate or enha nce comp etency developm ent or work

performan ce (Continu ous Workforce Inn ovation). The maturity trend inmotivating and ma naging p erformance begins with establishing basicperformance mana gement and compensation practices, then imp rovesthese practices through adap ting them to comp etency d evelopm ent andteam bu ild ing, and then looks for constant sources of innova tion.

Shaping the w orkforce — The effort to shap e the w orkforce to m eetbusiness needs beg ins at the Repeatable level by establishing basic pr acticesfor recru iting, selecting am ong job candid ates, and orienting peop le intonew assignm ents (Staffing). At the Defined level the organ ization beginsdev eloping strategic and near-term p lans for ensur ing that it has the corecomp etencies that it needs to meet current and future business demand s(Workforce Planning ). At the Managed level the organ ization sets andtracks targets for the d evelopmen t of know ledge an d skill in each of itscore comp etencies (Organizational Comp etency Manag emen t). At theOp timizing level the organization searches for inn ovative p ractices ortechnologies to help sha p e its w orkforce (Continuou s WorkforceInnovation). The maturity trend in shap ing the workforce begins w ithestablishing basic staffing p ractices, grows to developing p lans forwor kforce d evelopm ent, sets and tracks objectives for competen cies in thew orkforce, and then looks for constan t sources of innov ation.




3 Applying the Peop le CMM

The P-CMM adap ts the architecture an d the m aturity framework un derlying the CMM for use with p eople-related imp rovement issues.The CMM focuses on helping orga nizations imp rove their softw aredevelopment p rocesses. By adap ting the m aturity framework an d theCMM architecture, activities gu ided by th e P-CMM can be more easilyintegrated into existing softwa re process imp rovem ent progra ms. Thissection d iscusses using th e P-CMM to guide the peop le-related asp ects of an improvement program.

The value of the P-CMM is in the w ay tha t organ izations use it. The

P-CMM can be ap plied by an organ ization in tw o primary w ays:q as a stand ard for assessing w orkforce p ractices

q as a guide in planning and imp lementing improv ement activities

Each key p rocess area in the P -CMM is organ ized int o five sections calledcommon features. The comm on featur es (Commitmen t to Perform,Ability to Perform, Activities Perform ed, Measu remen t and Analysis, andVerifying Imp lemen tation) specify the key p ractices tha t, when collectivelyad d ressed, accomplish the goals of the key pr ocess area. Some of thesecommon featur es imp lement the p ractices, w hile other comm on features

establish the su pp ort needed to institutiona lize their perform ance. Thesekey p ractices are contained in the People Capability Maturity Model

(P-CMM) [Curtis95].

3.1 P-CMM-Based Assessments

The P-CMM p rovides a stand ard against wh ich th e w orkforce practices of an organ ization can be assessed. A P-CMM-based assessmen t may be

condu cted by itself, or jointly with som e other assessmen t of theorganization, such as an em ployee opinion assessment or software p rocessassessment. The assessment team for a P-CMM-based assessment w ouldinclud e at a minimu m som eone skilled in cond ucting such assessments,




Applying the People CMM

someone w ho w ill be involved in mak ing P-CMM-related imp rovem ents,and som eone from the hu man resou rces function. A single person mayfill m ore tha n on e of these roles.

During th e fall of 1995 a P-CMM-based assessmen t meth od will bedev eloped, and trial use of this method is schedu led for late 1995 and into1996. This assessmen t method is plan ned to be comp liant w ith the CMMAppr aisal Framew ork [Masters95], bu t it will be tailored so it consu mesless time and resources than a trad itional softwar e process assessment orCMM-based assessment. P-CMM-related training courses will also beavailable in 1996.

When a P-CMM-based assessment is cond ucted jointly with a softwar epr ocess assessmen t, data for the P-CMM-based assessment shou ld begathered sep arately, since the un it of stud y is not a p roject, as it is dur ing asoftware p rocess assessmen t. Because of its conten t, the P-CMM focuses onorganizational units such as group s, sections, and dep artmen ts, and howworkforce practices are cond ucted w ithin these u nits. Even so, a P-CMM-based assessment w ill use man y of the same conventions as a softwa reprocess assessment. For examp le, both are performed by a trainedassessmen t team , collect some initial d ata u sing qu estionn aires, observeconfid entiality of the information obtained , and interview p eople at

d ifferent levels of the organization . The results of a P-CMM-basedassessment m ight be presented at the same time as th ose of a p rocessassessment, but they shou ld be p resented as a separa te analysis of theorganization.

A P-CMM-based assessmen t w ill look at w orkforce practices as actuallyperformed across the organization. The P-CMM assessment teamdeterm ines whether a p ractice is imp lemented broa dly across theorganization and is institutionalized. The assessment team determineswh ether the goals and intent of each key process area have been

implemen ted. How ever, they need n ot assess key process areas formatu rity levels that are clearly beyond th e cur rent m atur ity of theorganization.





The results of a P-CMM-based assessment ar e presen ted a s a profile of theorganization’s strengths an d weakn esses against the key process areas of the P-CMM. The matu rity level of an orga nization is the low est level forwh ich a ll of the key p rocess areas hav e been su ccessfully imp lemented .The results of the assessmen t ind icate the p ractices or process areas thatthe organization shou ld consider wh en ini t iat ing an imp rovementprogram.

In the futu re, the P-CMM should help an organization comp are thematu rity of its wor kforce pr actices with the state of the p ractice acrossindu stry. Using the P-CMM as a benchmark w ill require that P-CMM-based assessmen ts be submitted to a comm on rep ository, such as the

Process App raisal Inform ation System (PAIS) at the SEI. These da ta w illindicate trends in the indu stry in ad dition to p roviding a benchmark.

3.2 Using the P-CMM as a Guide forImprovement

3.2.1 G u i d an ce P ro vid e d b y th e P-CM M

The P-CMM prov ides gu idan ce for imp lementing p ractices in anorganizational imp rovement p rogram. There are two levels of guid anceprovided by the P-CMM: guid ance on a strategy for developing theorganization over time and guidan ce on p ractices that the organizationcan em ploy to solve explicit problems or shortcomings in its w orkforcepractices.

In prov iding gu idan ce, the P-CMM does not specify the explicit wor kforcepr actices to be imp lemen ted . Rather, it sets a fram ework for selecting andtailoring p ractices to the organ ization’s history, cultu re, and environ men t.There are m any professional sources that d escribe specific method s for





wor kforce practices such as performa nce mana gemen t, team bu ild ing, andtraining.

The P-CMM does not provide gu idance on how to imp lement theimprovem ent program itself. The P-CMM is a roadm ap for organizationalgrowth an d n eeds to be coup led w ith a model of how to imp lement animprovement program. A model for condu cting imp rovement programswill be p resented in Section 3.4.

3.2.2 Sk ip p in g M atu r i ty Levels

The ma tu rity levels in the P-CMM d escribe the cha racteristic practices of an organ ization at that m aturity level. Each level forms a found ation onwh ich an organization can build w orkforce p ractices effectively a ndefficiently at succeeding m atur ity levels. How ever, an organization canoccasionally ben efit from imp lementing p rocesses described at a highermatu rity level even thou gh it ha s not satisfied all the key process areas at alower m aturity level.

The P-CMM shou ld n ot be interp reted a s proh ibiting p ractices or activities

from higher m atu rity levels that the organ ization find s beneficial. Forexamp le, team-related processes are not d iscussed in th e P-CMM u ntil theMana ged level, yet organizations at the Initial level may h aveimplemented self-man aged teams for some activities, or m ay even have along history of using m entors. Similarly, a less matu re organization m aybe able to train its workforce in areas that wou ld correspond to corecompeten cies (Defined level), pr ovide team-based incentives (Managedlevel), or use m entors (Mana ged level).

Imp rovem ent of personal comp etencies is the focus of an Op timizing key

process area; how ever, un derstand ing and imp roving ind ividu al work processes, through such m eans as the ap plication of the Personal Softw areProcess [Hu mp hrey95a, 95b], can p rovide substan tial ind ividu al benefits atlower m atu rity levels. These p ractices shou ld b e institutionalized





throu ghou t the organization wh en the organization achieves theOptimizing level.

If the organ ization sees the opp ortu nity to benefit from a h igher ma turitypra ctice and can supp ort its performance, then th e organization shouldimp lement it. Ho w ever, the ability to imp lement pra ctices from highermatu rity levels d oes not imp ly that matu rity levels can be skipp edwithou t risk. There is risk in implementing pra ctices without the p roperfoun dation being d eveloped ben eath them. For examp le, the team-building literature contains m any examp les of failed team s [Mohrm an95].These failures occurred because the found ation in com mu nication skillsand p articipatory culture had not been properly developed. Similarly,

ma ny inn ovative m otivational p ractices fail to work effectively in anenvironm ent w here there are no objective performance criteria or w herebasic performan ce manag emen t pra ctices are p erformed inconsistently.

Skipp ing levels is counterp rod uctive because each level forms a n ecessaryfoun dation u pon wh ich the next level can be built. The P-CMM wasdesigned to develop the sup porting found ation needed to ensure thathigher level pr actices cou ld achieve their full imp act on raising w orkforcecapability. Processes withou t the prop er foun d ation fail at the very pointthey are needed most – und er stress – and they p rovide n o basis for future

improvement .

3.3 Locating a P-CMM-Based ImprovementProgram in the Organization

Organ izations are initially inclined to hou se the coordina tion of a P-CMM-based imp rovement program in the hum an resources function. How ever,there is a strong belief that this is not the m ost effective hom e for such a

program . The P-CMM Advisory Board, many of wh om are hum anresour ces executives, was stron g in its belief that P-CMM-basedimprov ements not be perceived as a function of the hu man resources





grou p. Rather, they strongly advised that peop le-related imp rovem ents beintegrated w ith existing softwa re process imp rovem ent progra ms.

The P-CMM Advisory Board recomm end ed that a h um an resourcespr ofessional be add ed to th e software engineering p rocess grou p (SEPG) towor k on P-CMM-based imp rovem ents. Thus, the message carried tosoftware executives is, “We have a program to add ress the imp rovementof you r overall softwa re operation. This pr ogram includ es comp onen tsthat ad dress pr ocess, technology, and peop le.” The P-CMM part of theimprov ement p rogram is where the people-related practices are ad d ressed.

Many h um an resources professionals have reported a frustration in notbeing considered part of the mainstream of the organization. Accord ingly,they are concerned that an improvement p rogram coming from thehu ma n resou rces function will not be considered a critical part of theimp rovem ent effort. Accord ingly, includ ing P-CMM imp rovem ents aspart of the overall imp rovement p rogram th at is hou sed in adevelopm ent organization provides a vehicle for hu man resourcespr ofessionals to partn er in a mainstream effort to imp rove the bu siness.Further, coordinating P-CMM-based im pr ovem ents from th e SEPGincludes m embers of the w orkforce directly in m aking imp rovements thataffect them . This involvem ent instills a greater sense of ow nersh ip of the

improv ed p ractices.

3.4 Implementing a P-CMM-Based ImprovementProgram

The SEI has d eveloped a mod el for improv ement p rograms that isgrou nd ed in several years experience with an d lessons learned fromsoftware p rocess imp rovement p rograms. This mod el, presented in

Figu re 3.1, is a life cycle for orga nizing th e ph ases of an im provem entprogram . It is called the IDEALSM mod el after the first letters in each of its

SM IDEAL is a service mar k of Carn egie Mellon University.





five ph ases: initiating, d iagnosing , establishing, acting, and leverag ing. Inthe following pa ragraph s, an ap proach to cond ucting a P-CMM-basedimprovemen t program will be presented throu gh the ph ases of the IDEALmodel.

Stimulus forImprovement

Set Context& Establish

Sponsorship

EstablishImprovement

Infrastructure

Appraise &Characterize

CurrentPractice

DevelopRecommendations

& DocumentPhase Results

Set Strategy& Priorities

Establish ProcessAction Teams

DefineProcesses& Measures

Plan &Execute

Pilots

Plan, Execute,

& TrackInstallation

Document& AnalyzeLessons

Leveraging

Acting

Establishing

Diagnosing

Initiating

Plan Actions

ReviseOrganizationalApproach

Figure 3.1 The IDEALSM

Model

One of the clearest lessons that w e hav e learned is that successfulimprovem ent program s mu st be run like any other project. That is, theymu st have plans, their progress mu st be tracked, and someone mu st beheld accountable for their performa nce. The IDEAL mod el presents aproven life cycle that can be used to man age and guide an improvemen t

progra m in the sam e way th at a stand ard developm ent life cycle is usedwith a softwa re developm ent project.





The first stage of IDEAL is the Initiating ph ase, wh erein executive sup portis engaged an d the infrastructure for imp rovement is organized. Themost comm on reason for the failure of imp rovemen t progra ms is lack of executive sup port. The program should n ot be initiated u ntil executivesup port is ensured . The effort begins with one or more briefings toexecutives. These briefings shou ld includ e inform ation about

q the benefits of P-CMM-based imp rovem ents such as redu ced turn overand greater readiness to p erform in fast-paced environments

q a d escription of the effort and sched ule involved in the imp rovemen tprogram

q executive respon sibilities un der th e P-CMM and in sup por ting the

improvement program

Once executive supp ort is ensured, the infrastructure for imp rovementshould be organized. There are several group s that should be created torun the imp rovement program. The program should be run from animprovem ent group such as an SEPG or some other entity that reports toline man agement in the organization. If no such grou p exists, then oneshou ld be created explicitly for making p eople-related imp rovem ents.Such a grou p shou ld include p eople with expertise in hu man resourcesand in software develop men t. Such a cross-functional team ha s the bestchance of mak ing sensible imp rovemen ts in the organ ization.

The imp rovemen t group shou ld report to a Managem ent SteeringComm ittee that oversees and app roves the improv ement effort. Thisgroup should h ave representation both from line operations and from thehu ma n resources function. It should h ave immed iate know ledge of howvarious p eople-related pra ctices are being performed w ithin theorgan ization and a vision for imp roving the current p ractices. Thesteering group mu st also have au thority to comm it some of their ownpeop le to improv ement activities.

Once executive supp ort and an infrastructure for imp rovement h ave beenestablished, the organization then p repa res to enter the Diagnostic phase.During th is phase, the organization condu cts a P-CMM-based assessment





and d evelops the findings and recommen d ations. P-CMM-basedassessmen ts have been d iscussed in Section 3.1.

With th e assessment results in hand , the organization is ready to enter the Establishing ph ase. In this ph ase, the impr ovem ent team selects several of the most p ressing p roblems for action an d g ets the Managem ent SteeringComm ittee to ap pr ove this strategic selection. Since the organization canabsorb only a limited amou nt of change at on e time, only the m ost seriousprob lems should be chosen for action.

An action team shou ld then be organized to add ress each p roblem. The

mem bers of the action team should be chosen to ensure that it containsexpertise both in the problem an d in the method of solution. For instance,an action team add ressing performance managem ent in a softwareorganization should have p eople who u nd erstand the criteria againstwh ich software p erformance should be m easured, how best to work w ithsoftwa re engineers in analyzing job perform ance, the m ethod s of evaluating job p erformance, what kind of recognition and reward smotivate softw are engineers, and oth er related topics that are covered inthe Performance Managem ent key pr ocess area. Such a team will consistof people who know software and people who u nd erstand p erformancemanagement methods .

One of the first du ties of the team is to develop an action p lan thatadd resses planned improvem ents in their problem area. Developing andtracking su ch an a ction p lan is one of the distingu ishing factors of successfu l imp rovem ent teams. To ensu re that the action team stays on asuccessful trajectory, the team shou ld b e facilitated by someone from th ecore imp rovement group.

Once the action team has d eveloped a basic p lan for its activities, it

launches into the Acting ph ase. The action team shou ld identify bestworkforce practices that are a lread y being u sed in th e organization andbuild arou nd th em. Ad d itional practices can be identified to imp lement akey process area comp letely. Any p roposed wor kforce practices shou ld be





3.5 Integrating Maturity-Based Improvement

Programs

The P-CMM ap plies the essential elements of a capa bility matu rity mod elto the w orkforce pra ctices of the organ ization. Therefore, organizationsthat hav e some experience in ap plying the CMM to imp rove theirsoftwar e d evelopm ent p rocesses will find the P-CMM to be comp atiblewith an imp rovement ph ilosophy they have already adopted . Both theCMM and P-CMM can be u sed in an IDEAL imp rovemen t cycle.

Using the CMM and P-CMM together in an imp rovement p rogram begsthe qu estion of wh ether the organization should synchronize its matu ritylevels on the two mod els. Maturity growth on one mod el d oes notrequire or restrict maturity growth on the other. How ever, matu ritygrowth on either mod el probably assists in m aturity growth on the other.

Both m od els begin at the Repeatable level by emp hasizing theresponsibility of p roject or unit m anagers for installing basic discip line intheir environm ents. Creating this basic d iscipline using either mod el aidsin creating the m anagem ent attitud es that sup port grow th in the other

mod el. Basic ma nagem ent d iscipline w ill aid both the pr ocess of dev eloping software or th e process of d eveloping the w orkforce.

At the Defined level, the analysis of know ledge and skills and thedetermination of core competencies requires an u nd erstanding of thework being p erformed . Thus, it is probably best that the organization havedefined its software pr ocess before it begins defining the know ledge an dskills requ ired by th e com petencies involved in its specific softwar eactivities. This may be the area of d epend ency between the two m odels.Certainly the concepts of an organization-wide w ay of performing

techn ical activities and of an organ ization’s core com petencies fit welltogether, each sup porting developm ent in the other. The P-CMMactivities for d efining an d dev eloping core comp etencies elaborate andextend the requ ired training p rogram activities described in th e CMM.





At the Managed level, the d ata being generated by the software p rocessprov ide an excellent source of information on wh ether the d evelopmen tof know ledge an d skills is being effective, and where shortfalls migh t exist.That is, a matu re software p rocess will provid e da ta that can be u sed inanalyzing th e trend s that form the core of ma naging th e organization’scompetency developm ent and p erforman ce alignm ent. At the same time,the d evelopm ent of high-perform ance, comp etency-based team s instillsthe kind of empow erment that ha s been observed in high-maturityorgan ization s [Billings94, Pau lk95].

At the Optimizing level, both m odels emp hasize establishing continuou simp rovem ent as an ordinary p rocess. Both mod els also seek to engage

individu als in making the continu ous improvem ent of their own w ork aperson al objective. Thus, at the Optim izing level the mod els begin tomerge in th eir search for w ays to imp rove p erforman ce continuou sly.At th is level, the capab ility of the p rocess will probably be d ifficult todistinguish from the capab ility of the work force.

Since both th e CMM and P-CMM share similar und erlying ph ilosoph iesabout how to change an d m ature an organization, it should not besurp rising that they sup por t each other at each level of ma turity. Thechallenge for an organ ization initiating an imp rovemen t program that

has both CMM and P-CMM comp onents is to integrate an imp rovementstrategy that allows imp rovemen ts guided by one mod el to help create anenvironment that supp orts improvements guided by the other model. Atthe same time, the organization m ust always balance the amou nt of change being u nd ertaken so that the workforce is not inu nd ated w ithchange activities that interfere with cond ucting th e organ ization’sbu siness. An organ ization that can balance these tensions andimprovem ent strategies will find that it has a pow erful comp etitivead van tage in a well-defined pr ocess being executed by a well-prepa red an dmotivated workforce.




4 References

[Basili83] Basili, V.R. & Hut chens, D .H . “An Empir ica l Study of aSyntactic Com plexity Fam ily.” IEEE Transactions on

Software Engineering 9, 6 (1983): 664-672.

[Bate94] Bate, R., et al. A Sy stems Engineering Capability M atu rity

Model, V ersion 1.0 (CMU/ SEI-94-HB-4, ADA293345).Pittsburg h, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carneg ieMellon Unive rsity, 1994.

[Billings94] Billings, C.; Clifton, J.; Kolkhorst, B.; Lee, E.; & Wingert,W.B. “Jou rney to a Matu re Softwar e Process.” IBM

Systems Journal 33, 1 (1994): 46-61.

[Boehm81] Boehm , B. Softw are Engin eering Economics. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Pren tice-Ha ll, 1981.

[Boehm88] Boehm, B. “A Sp ir al M ode l o f Soft war e Developmen t andEnhancement.” IEEE Compu ter 21, 5 (1988): 61-72.

[Brooks87] Brooks, F.P., Jr . “No Silver Bul let: Essence and Accidentsof Softwar e Engineering .” IEEE Comput er 20, 4 (Ap ril

1987): 10-19.[Commerce95] 1995 A ward Criteria, The Malcolm Baldridge National

Qu ality A ward . Gaithersbu rg, MD: Nationa l Institute of Stand ard s and Technology, U.S. Dept of Comm erce.

[Crosby79] Crosby, P.B. Qu ality is Free: The A rt of M aking Q uality

Certain . New York: Pengu in, 1979.

[Curtis81] Cur tis, B. “Substantia ting P rogr ammer Variability .”Proceedings of the IEEE 69, 7 (1981): 846.

[Curtis88] Curt is, B.; Krasner , H.; & Iscoe, N. “A Fie ld Study of the

Software Design Process for Large Systems.”Comm un ications of the ACM 31, 11 (1988): 1268-1287.




References

[Curtis90] Cur tis, B. “Managing t he Rea l Lever age in SoftwareProdu ctivity an d Quality.” A m erican Programm er 4(August 1990): 4-14.

[Curtis95] Cur tis, B.; Hefley , W .E.; & M iller , S. People Capability

M atu rity M odel (CMU/ SEI-95-MM-02). Pittsburgh , PA:Software Engineering Institute, Carn egie MellonUniversity, 1995.

[Deming86] Deming, W.E. Ou t of Crisis. Cam brid ge: MIT-CAES, 1986.

[Dion93] Dion , R. “Process Im provem en t an d th e Corp orateBalan ce Sheet.” IEEE Software 10, 4 (1993): 28-35.

[Goldenson95] Goldenson, D. R. & Herbsleb, J. D. “What Happens Afterthe App raisal? A Sur vey of Process Imp rovem entEfforts.” Proceedings of S EPG' 95. Boston, MA, 1995.

[Grady92] Grady, R.B. Practical Softw are M etrics For Project

M anagem ent and Process Improvement . EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Pren tice H all, 1992.

[Hansen89] Hansen, G. S. & W er ner fe lt , B. “Det er minant s o f Fir mPerforman ce: Relative Imp ortan ce of Econom ic andOrgan izational Factors.” Strategic Journal of Management

10 (1989): 399-411.

[Herbsleb94] Herbsleb, J., et a l. Benefit s of CM M -Based Softw are Process

Improvement : Init ial Result s (CMU/ SEI-94-TR-13, AD-A283848). Pittsbu rgh , PA: Software Engineering Institute,Carn egie Mellon Un iversity, 1994.

[Humphrey87] Humphr ey , W . & Sweet , W . A M ethod for A ssessing the

Softw are Engin eering Capability of Cont ractors (CMU/ SEI-87-TR-23, ADA187230). Pittsburgh, PA: SoftwareEngineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 1987.

[Humphrey88] Hu mph rey, W.S. “Characterizing the Software Process,”

IEEE Software 5, 2 (1988): 73-79.

[H u mp hrey89] H u m p h rey , W .S. Managing t he Softw are Process.Reading, MA: Add ison-Wesley, 1989.

46 n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01



References

[Hum phrey91] Hu mp hrey, W.S.; Snyd er, T.R.; & Willis, R.R. “SoftwareProcess Imp rovem ent at H ug hes Aircraft.” IEEE Software

8, 4 (1991): 11-23.

[Humphrey95a] Hum phrey, W.S. A Discipline for Software Engineering.New York: Add ison-Wesley Pu blishing Comp any, 1995.

[Humphrey95b] Hu mp hrey, W.S. “Why Should You Use a PersonalSoftware Process.” ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering

Notes, 20, 3(1995): 33-36.

[Johnson94a] Johnson, A. “Software Process Improvement Exper iencein the DP/ MIS Function.” 323-330. Proceedings of t he 16th

International Conference on Softw are Engin eering . IEEE

Com puter Society Press, 1994.

[Johnson94b] Johnson, J. “How We Climbed to Matur ity Level Two.” Application Development Trends 1, 4 (April 1994): 20-23.

[Juran89] Ju ran , J.M. Juran on Leadership for Qu ality . New York:Free Press, 1989.

[Kravetz88] Kravetz, D. The Human Resources Revolution . SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1988.

[Labor93] U .S. Dep t. o f Labor, Office of the Amer ican Wor kp lace.

High Performance W ork Practices and Firm Performance.Wash ington, D.C.: U.S. Dep t. of Labor, 1993.

[Lipke92] Lipke, W.H. & Bu tler , K.L. “Software P rocessImp rovem ent: A Success Story.” Crosstalk: The Journal of

Defense Software Engineering, 38 (November 1992): 29-31.

[Masters95] Ma sters, S. & Both w ell, C. CM M A ppraisal Framework,

V ersion 1.0 (CMU/ SEI-95-TR-001). Pittsburgh , PA:Software Engineering Institute, Carn egie MellonUniversity, 1995.




References

[Mavrinac95] Mavrinac, S. C.; Jones, N. R.; & Meyer, M. W. T he

Financial and N on-Financial R etu rns to Inn ovativ e

W orkplace Practices: A Crit ical R eview. Cambridge, MA:Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration,1995.

[Mohrman95] Mohrman, S. A.; Cohen, S. G.; & Mohrman, A. M., Jr . Designing Team-Based Organizations. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass, 1995.

[Nidiffer95] Nidiffer, K. E. “How Grumman Data Reached MaturityLevel 3.” Application Development Trends 2, 3 (March1995): 23-27.

[Paulk93a] Paulk, M.C.; Curt is, B.; Chriss is , M.B.; & Weber , C. V.Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1

(CMU/ SEI-93-TR-24, ADA263403). Pittsburgh, PA:Software Engineering Institute, Carn egie MellonUniversity, 1993.

[Paulk93b] Paulk, M.C.; Weber , C.V.; Garcia, S.; Chrissis , M.B.; &Bush, M. Key Practices of the Capabilit y M aturity M odel,

V ersion 1.1 (CMU/ SEI-93-TR-25, ADA263432). Pittsburgh ,PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie MellonUniversity, 1993.

[Paulk95] Paulk , M.C.; Weber , C .V.; Cur tis, B.; & Chr issis, M.B. T he

Capability Maturity Model for Software: Guidelines for

Improving the S oftware Process . Reading, MA: Ad dison-Wesley, 1995.

[Radice85] Radice, R.A.; Harding, J.T.; Munnis , P.E.; & Phillips , R.W.“A Program ming Process Stud y.” IBM Sy stems Journ al

24, 2 (1985): 79-90.

[Sackman68] Sackman, H.; Ericsson, W.J.; & Grant, E.E. “ExploratoryExperim ental Stud ies Comp aring On line and Offline

Performance.” Communications of the ACM 11 , 1 (1968):3-11.




References

[Selfridge94] Selfridge, W. “PI at Rockwell - Experiences, SEPG Process,PAL, Recogn ition of ROI.” Proceedings of the 6th SEPG

N ational M eetin g . Pittsbu rgh , PA: Software EngineeringInstitut e, Carneg ie Mellon Univer sity, 1994.

[Sud low94] Sud low, B. “Moving fr om Chaos to SEI Level 2.” Software

Development 2, 12 (1994): 36-40.

[Valett89] Va let t, J.D . & M cGarr y, F.E. “A Summar y o f Soft war eMeasur emen t Exper iences in the Software EngineeringLaboratory.” Journal of Sy stems and S oftw are 9, 2 (1989):137-148.

[Wohlwend93] Wohlwend, H. & Rosenbaum, S. “Software

Imp rovem ents in an Internation al Comp any ,” 212-220.Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on

Softw are Engineering . Los Alam itos, CA: IEEE Com puterSociety Press, 1993.




References




Appendix: Goals for Each KeyProcess Area

The goals for each P-CMM key p rocess area are listed by matu rity levelbelow. Figu re A.1 dep icts the key process areas w ithin each matu rity level.

Level 2—Repeatable

CompensationTraining

Performance ManagementStaffing

CommunicationWork Environment

Level 1—Initial

Level 3—Defined

Participatory CultureCompetency-Based Practices

Career DevelopmentCompetency Development

Workforce PlanningKnowledge and Skills Analysis

Level 4—ManagedOrganizational Performance Alignment

Organizational Competency ManagementTeam-Based Practices

Team BuildingMentoring

Level 5—Optimizing

Continuous Workforce InnovationCoaching


Instill basicdisciplineintoworkforceactivities

Identify primarycompetenciesand alignworkforceactivitieswith them

Quantitatively manageorganizational growthin workforcecapabilities andestablishcompetency-based teams

Continuously improvemethods for developingpersonal andorganizationalcompetence

Fi g u r e A. 1 P -C MM Ke y P r o c e s s Ar e a s

CMU/SEI-95-MM-01 People Capab ility Maturity Mod el n A-1



Goals for Each Key Process Area

A.1 The Key Process Areas for Level 2: Repeatable

The goals of Work Environm ent are

1. An environment that suppor ts the performance of bus iness processesis established and maintained.

2. The resources needed by the workforce to perform their assignmentsare mad e available.

3. Dis tr act ions in the work environment a re minimized .

The goals of Comm un ication are

1. A social environment that suppor ts task performance and

coordination among individu als and grou ps is established andmaintained.

2. Information is shared across levels of the organization.

3. Individu als develop skills to share information and coordinate theiractivities.

4. Individu als are able to raise grievances and have them addressed bymanagement .

The goals of Staffing are

1. The organization actively recruits for qualified talent .

2. The most qualified candidate is selected for each posit ion.

3. Selected candidates are transitioned into their new posit ions.

4. Members of a unit are involved in its s taffing activi ties.

The goals of Performance Man agement are

1. Job performance is measured against objective criteria anddocumented.

2. Job performance is regularly discussed to identify actions that canimprove i t .

3. Development oppor tunit ies are discussed wi th each individual .

4. Per fo rmance p r ob lems ar e managed .

5. Outstanding performance is r ecognized .

A-2 n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01




The goals of Training are

1. Training in the critical skills requ ired in each un it is pr ovided .

2. Individu als receive t imely t raining that is needed to perform theirassignments.

3. Training oppor tunit ies are made available to all individuals.

The goals of Comp ensation are

1. Compensation strategies and activit ies are planned, executed, andcommunicated.

2. Compensation is equitable relat ive to skil l qualificat ions andperformance.

3. Adjus tments in compensat ion are made per iodically based on d efinedcriteria.

A.2 The Key Process Areas for Level 3: Defined

The goals of Knowledge an d Sk ills Analysis are

1. The core competencies required to perform the organization's businessprocesses are known .

2. Knowledge and skills profiles exist for each business process.

3. Knowledge and skills profiles are updated for anticipated future needs.The goals of Workforce Plann ing are

1. The organization develops a s trategic plan for long-term developmentof the competencies and work force need ed for its business operations.

2. Near-term w orkforce and competency development act ivit ies areplann ed to satisfy both current and strategic workforce needs.

3. The organization develops talent for each of i ts key posit ions.

4. The organization tracks performance in achieving i ts strategic andnear-term workforce development objectives.

The goals of Comp etency Developmen t are

1. The organization knows its current capability in each of the corecompetencies requ ired to perform its business processes.





2. The organization d evelops capabilit ies in i ts core competencies.

3. Individu als develop their knowledge and skills in the organization 'score competencies.

The goals of Career D evelopm ent are

1. Career development act ivit ies are conducted w ith each individual .

2. The organization offers career opportunities that provide growth in i tscore competencies.

3. Individuals are mot ivated to pursue career goals that opt imize thevalue of their knowled ge and skills to the organ ization.

The goals of Competen cy-Based Practices are

1. Workforce practices are tailored to motivate individu als and group s toimp rove their know ledge an d skills in the core comp etencies of theorganization.

2. Workforce activit ies are adjusted to sup port developm ent in the corecomp etencies of the organ ization.

3. Compensation and reward strategies are tailored to motivate growth inthe core competen cies of the orga nization.

The goals of Participatory Cultu re are

1. Communicat ion act ivit ies are enhanced to improve the flow of information within the organization.

2. Decisions are made at the lowest appropriate level of the organization.

3. Individu als and groups participate in decision-making processes thatinvolve their w ork or commitments.

A.3 The Key Process Areas for Level 4: Managed

The goals of Mentoring are

1. Mentoring activi ties are matched to defined objectives.

2. Mentors are selected and prepared for their responsibilit ies.3. Mentors are made available for guidance and supp ort to other

individuals or groups.

A-4 n People Capability Maturity Model CMU/SEI-95-MM-01




The goals of Team Building are

1. Teams are formed to improve the performance of interdependenttasks.

2. Team ass ignments are made to integrate complementary knowledgeand skills.

3. Team members develop the ir team skills .

4. Team members part icipate in decisions regarding their work.

5. The organization provides standard processes for tailoring and u se byteams in performing their work.

The goals of Team -Based Practices are

1. The organization adjusts its workforce practices and activities tomotivate and sup port the d evelopm ent of team-based comp etenciesw ithin the organization.

2. Workforce activit ies are tailored to support the needs of different typesof teams w ithin th e organization.

3. Team performance cr iter ia are defined and measured.

4. Compensat ion and reward systems are tailored to motivate improvedteam performan ce.

The goals of Organizational Comp etency Man agement are

1. Measurable goals for capability in each of the organization's corecompetencies are defined .

2. Progress toward achieving capability goals in the organization's corecompetencies is qu antified and m anag ed.

3. The knowledge and skills-building capabil ity of the organization'scomp etency develop men t activities is know n qu antitatively for each of its core comp etencies.

The goals of Organizational Performance Alignmen t are

1. Measurable goals for aligning individual , team, unit , andorganizational performance are defined.

2. Progress toward achieving performance alignment goals is quantifiedand managed.





3. The capability of workforce activit ies to align individu al, team, unit ,and organizational performance is know n qu antitatively.

A.4 The Key Process Areas for Level 5: Optimizing

The goals of Personal Comp etency D evelopm ent are

1. Ind ividu als know their capabili ty in each of the competencies involvedin their wor k.

2. Individu als cont inuously improve their knowledge and skills in thecomp etencies involved in their work.

3. Part icipation in imp roving personal competencies is organization-wide.

The goals of Coaching are

1. Coaches are selected for their expertise and prepared for theirresponsibilities.

2. Coaches work wi th individu als to improve their personal competencyand p erformance.

3. Coaches work wi th teams to improve their team-based competenciesand p erformance.

The goals of Contin uou s Workforce Inn ovation are

1. Innovative workforce practices and technologies are evaluated tod etermine th eir effect on imp roving core com peten cies andperformance.

2. The organization’s workforce practices and activi ties are improvedcontinuously.

3. Participation in imp roving the organization’s workforce practices andactivities is organization-wide.

people capability maturity model-sei

Documents