As such, it served as an effective check-and-balance for the entire key
process area. If an organization had performed the activities preceding it,
then that organization should be able to measure those activities. Then,
the measurements could be reported to management and software quality
assurance (as discussed in the Verifying Implementation Key Practices).
The effectiveness of the processes for a particular key process area,
as well as any deficiencies, could then be determined by reviewing the
154 n Interpreting the CMMI
metrics collected. In CMMI, we now have Generic Practice 2.8 Monitor
and Control the Process. This practice has far fewer examples of practical
metrics. Although the Measurement and Analysis process area has useful
information, much of this information seems to relate to higher maturity
levels. If an organization is just beginning the road to process improvement,
how much of this process area must be implemented? The reason
this process area was pulled out of each key process area of the CMM and
is now its own process area was as a result of input from higher maturity
organizations.
Pages:
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362