Managing the software process
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
IT managers commonly complain of lack of resources for Software Process Improvement (SPI) projects. The authors postulate that this comes from lack of understanding by the company board of the benefit of SPI, and perhaps a lack of understanding by IT managers of the needs of the company board? So how can IT managers obtain satisfaction? A shortcoming of the ISO-9001 and the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) approaches to process improvement (in software production) is the lack of explicit connection to the business goals of the organization in question. In the eyes of business management, therefore, these models appear to represent an ‘idealized‘ view of the world. A negative assessment against such a model is insufficient, in itself, to justify significant expenditure on an improvement plan. While a standardized model is invaluable as a common reference for measurement and comparison, the initiation of a meaningful improvement plan requires investment of money and allocation of resources; and that can only take place if current business goals, not an ‘ideal‘ model, are the motivating force. The draft SPICE method has recognized this need. It proposes the comparison of an assessed capability profile with a target capability profile. However the current draft standard (version 2.0) contains little guidance on how to arrive at such a target capability profile. This paper describes a method for drawing up such a target capability profile. To preserve clarity, we have placed the description of our method in the context of a SPICE assessment and process improvement, but the method would also be suitable for use with ISO, CMM, ITIL or other process models.1 In all cases an improvement plan can be set up which is visibly geared to the business goals.