Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon

Relationships Between CMMI and Six Sigma

Jeannine Siviy
M. Lynn Penn
Erin Harper

CMU/SEI-2005-TN-005
December 2005

Sofware Engineering Measurement and Analysis

Unlimited distribution subject to the copyright.

 

 

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

1 Introduction

Organizations begin the journey of process improvement for many different reasons. Some realize the need for improvement when their products fail after release and must be repaired. Others are driven by mandates and regulatory requirements, such as the need to achieve a Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Maturity Level 3 to be able to bid on a contract or show that they comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Significant business issues, such as a lost contract or a new market opportunity, can also draw attention to process improvement.

The most effective and sustained improvement of any type is done in response to performance needs, not compliance goals. Whether an organization's improvement is focused on the performance of a product, project, or process, its purpose should be to close the gap between actual and desired performance--where "desired" is driven by factors such as customer requirements and the needs of the business.

Organizations that endeavor to improve often find themselves juggling many solutions: maturity models, EIA standards, acquisition standards, ISO standards, measurement best practices, codified life-cycle processes such as Team Software Process (TSP), software development principles, and more. All improvement initiatives selected by an organization should be implemented in an integrated fashion, not as layered or stovepiped efforts. And the result should be a set of organizational processes, used by everyone--from developer to software engineering process group (SEPG)1 member to manager--that reflect the features of the improvement initiatives chosen.

This document focuses on two popular improvement initiatives: CMMI and Six Sigma. As CMMI has become more widely institutionalized and Six Sigma has made its way into engineering disciplines, numerous questions have arisen, including the following:

The primary focus of this document is to answer the first two questions, which relate to implementing more than one initiative at a time. If multiple initiatives are going to be integrated successfully under the umbrella of standard organizational processes, those designing the processes must understand the relationships and synergies among the initiatives.

After providing a brief summary of CMMI fundamentals and an overview of what Six Sigma is and what it is not, this document explores the relationships between CMMI and Six Sigma and how they can be used together.

 

 

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

2 Overview of CMMI

The Software Engineering Institute (SEI) has been involved in the creation and maintenance of various capability models for many years. These models are non-prescriptive collections of best practices that infuse quality into products through the use of better processes throughout the entire product life cycle. The CMMI model, developed by a group of industry, government, and SEI representatives, is made up of best-of-the-best processes gleaned from multiple disciplines. It provides guidance in specific process areas by providing goals and a set of expected practices needed to meet those goals.

In practice, if an organization plots its typical business rhythms, it can organize its practices into groups. One way of grouping like activities is the CMMI process areas. The process areas are divided into four categories: Process Management, Project Management, Engineering, and Support.

CMMI process areas are also categorized into several disciplines. The base model contains 22 process areas that cover the systems and software engineering disciplines. To satisfy a process area, certain unique characteristics must be present. These characteristics are described in what the CMMI calls specific goals. The model also includes generic goals, which are goals that appear in multiple process areas. The activities that are expected to result in the achievement of specific goals are called specific practices, while generic practices appear in multiple process areas and are considered important in achieving associated generic goals. All process areas are also classified as Fundamental or Progressive. Fundamental process areas should be implemented first to ensure that the prerequisites are met to successfully implement the Progressive process areas [Chrissis 03].

In addition to the 22 process areas in the base model, there are 3 process areas that cover integrated product and process development (IPPD) and 1 that covers supplier sourcing. IPPD is a systematic approach that achieves a timely collaboration of relevant stakeholders throughout the life of the product to better satisfy customer needs, expectations, and requirements [Chrissis 03]. Team structure plays a part in the successful development of products. Many organizations are adopting team structures and enabling better group dynamics. Projects and organizations frequently obtain product components from suppliers and subcontractors outside the company. Although it is often more cost effective to acquire something from outside than build it from scratch inside, the relationship with suppliers must be managed within the project to avoid schedule slips and identify team dependencies.

2.1 Process Management

The Process Management process areas provide the framework for institutionalization and consistent execution of processes across an organization. They provide an organization with the capability to document and share best practices, organizational process assets, and learning across the organization [Chrissis 03]. The process areas in this category are

2.2 Project Management

Organizations are made up of individual projects or programs, which usually deliver the organization's products. The Project Management process areas cover the project-management activities related to planning, monitoring, and controlling projects [Chrissis 03].The process areas in this category are

2.3 Engineering

Engineering process areas cover development and maintenance activities that are shared across engineering disciplines (e.g., systems engineering and software engineering). They apply to the development of any product or service in the engineering development domain [Chrissis 03].The process areas in this category are

2.4 Support

All projects include a group of activities which are the underpinning of the production and development efforts. Support process areas cover the activities that support product development and maintenance [Chrissis 03]. The process areas in this category are

 

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

3 Overview of Six Sigma

Six Sigma is a holistic approach to business improvement that includes philosophy, performance measurements, improvement frameworks, and a toolkit--all of which are intended to complement and enhance existing engineering, service, and manufacturing processes. Because of its many dimensions, Six Sigma can serve as both an enterprise governance model and a tactical improvement engine.

Initially, the focus of Six Sigma was to improve manufacturing processes. As it has matured and become more widely used, organizations have been applying this data-driven improvement initiative to the rest of their business life cycles and supply chains. Applications in service or transactional organizations are sometimes termed the "second wave" of Six Sigma implementation. Applications in engineering, including those in software and systems, are sometimes termed the "third wave" of Six Sigma implementation.

The Six Sigma philosophy is to improve customer satisfaction through the prevention and elimination of defects and, as a result, increase business profitability. Six Sigma defines defects in terms of the customer's (not the engineer's) viewpoint. Therefore, defects are product, service, or process variations which prevent customers from having their needs met, or which add cost, whether or not that cost is detected. Business profitability is the central motive of Six Sigma.

The quest to achieve the desired level of performance (as measured by sigma or another gauge) is based on the following key underlying principles of statistical thinking:

Figure 1: Representation of Statistical Thinking

The paradigm of statistical thinking is embodied in Six Sigma's methodologies, which are used as a basis for executing improvement projects. The following frameworks currently prevail:

As organizations institutionalize Six Sigma and the other initiatives of their choosing, they go through a data-driven journey of discovery about their goals and processes, the characterization of those processes, the identification of critical control factors, and the improvement of those processes, all of which lead to the ability to predict performance. As their data usage matures, they better understand their processes' behaviors, interrelationships, and dynamics, and how this information can be used to gain competitive advantage.

The Six Sigma toolkit supports process improvement with a comprehensive suite of statistical and non-statistical methods from previous evolutions of quality- and business-improvement initiatives. It is important to remember that the Six Sigma toolkit is dynamic and organization-specific. The decision to adapt, add, or focus on specific methods should be made to better meet customer needs and increase business benefits. Additionally, the toolkit should be adapted for the domain. Figure 3 shows a DMAIC toolkit that has been adapted for use by an SEPG that is using the Goal-Question-Indicator-Measure (GQ4IM) and Practical Software and Systems Measurement (5PSM) methods to support their CMMI implementation. Other possible adjustments would be to elaborate on "modeling" to show that it includes Bayesian mode6ling, or to make explicit parametric vs. non parametric methods.

Figure 2: DMAIC Roadmap from SEI Course

Figure 2: DMAIC Roadmap from SEI Course "Measuring for Performance-Driven Improvement"

 

Figure 3: Tailored DMAIC Toolkit from SEI Course

Figure 3: Tailored DMAIC Toolkit from SEI Course "Measuring for Performance-Driven Improvement"

 

There are several misconceptions about Six Sigma that need to be addressed before we elaborate on its connections with CMMI.7

Six Sigma is not

Three of these statements, in particular, merit elaboration. They are discussed briefly below, and more information is provided in Section 4.

Six Sigma success is not equivalent to compliance with standards and models, and vice versa.

Industry models and standards frequently demand measurements, monitoring, and control. Frequently used standards include CMMI models, ISO, IEEE standards, and ISO 12207. Six Sigma can be used to achieve compliance with aspects of each of these standards. However, interpreting Six Sigma usage as achievement of model compliance, and likewise assuming Six Sigma when compliance is found, is a mistake.

Six Sigma is not limited to use in high maturity organizations.

In organizations that primarily use CMMI, many people associate Six Sigma with the high maturity process areas. However, there is a direct connection between Six Sigma and the generic practices, which are used for process areas at all maturity levels. Six Sigma enables a tactical approach to the implementation of the generic practices, and therefore much of the intent of the high-maturity process areas is implemented at lower maturity or within the continuous representation. This drastically accelerates the cycle time required for the final steps to high maturity by putting the building blocks for the high-maturity process areas in place.

Six Sigma is not a competitor to CMMI or other process models and standards.

There are many domain-specific models and standards. Six Sigma is not domain specific and can be a governance model or a tactical improvement engine. It can provide the problem definition and statement of benefit against which a decision about adopting a technology can be made. It can help solve specific problems and improve specific products or processes within the larger context of overall organizational process improvement. Or, in more general terms, it can serve as an enabler for the successful implementation of domain-specific improvement models [Bergey 04].

 

 

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

4 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Strategies

An increasing number of papers have been published about organizations' successful integration of CMMI and Six Sigma. These organizations have found ways to overcome the perception that the initiatives are competitors or mutually exclusive alternatives and are effectively blending them to achieve their organizational missions.

From the published information available, we abstracted the following strategies for using these initiatives together. This is not an exhaustive list, but rather reflective of patterns we have observed, overlaid with what our experience tells us works well. This list does not presume that CMMI precedes Six Sigma adoption or vice versa.

Implement CMMI process areas as Six Sigma projects.

In the most straightforward sense, this means that the objective of the Six Sigma project team is to implement a process area or a group of process areas. Their task is to define the problem or opportunity and to use available data to inform the improvement or design of processes that will serve the organizational mission and meet model requirements. Depending on whether the process area implementation involves updating existing processes or defining new processes, DMAIC, DFSS, or Lean might be appropriate. Examples of this have been shown in presentations by Northrop Grumman and Raytheon.

When using CMMI and Six Sigma in this fashion, it is important to remember this conventional wisdom: "map the model to the process, not the process to the model."

Use Six Sigma as the tactical engine for high capability and high maturity.

From a process definition standpoint, there is natural synergy between the high maturity process areas and the tenets of Six Sigma's DMAIC framework. As such, the tactics of Six Sigma can be used to directly enrich the defined processes that address the high maturity process areas. For instance, the processes related to the Quantitative Process Management and Causal Analysis and Resolution process areas would reflect both the specific practices of those process areas and the roadmap steps, substeps, and tools of DMAIC.

Staff members from Northrop Grumman have given presentations on their use of Six Sigma to achieve high maturity. While other organizations are also using this approach, they have not shared their identities and experiences [Bergey 04].

A variation on this theme is to use Six Sigma as a tactical engine for the engineering process areas. In this instance, tenets of DFSS would be used to enrich the processes that address the engineering process areas. Then DMAIC could be coupled with the generic practices to institutionalize, optimize, and achieve high capability in those processes.

Apply Six Sigma to improve or optimize an organization's improvement strategy and processes.

Six Sigma can be used in making decisions about the adoption of improvement initiatives and in the management and overhead associated with adoption. Here are different ways of applying Six Sigma in this context:

  1. appraisal streamlining and cost reduction for ARC Class B and C methods
  2. identification of highest priority organizational problems to inform decisions about improvement project selection and portfolio management
  3. optimization of the CMMI and overall improvement program execution

DMAIC and Lean seem particularly well suited to these approaches, although DFSS could have a role in the initial definition of SEPG processes. If combined with the previous strategies, an organization might use the "Define, Measure, Analyze" steps of DMAIC to define an improvement project portfolio that serves the organization's mission. Using CMMI for guidance and possibly as governance for specific improvements, the organization could then employ DMAIC, Lean, or DFSS for each respective improvement effort and propel itself toward "control" and "optimization" one project at a time. A focus on mission and performance ultimately results in compliance to the model.

Integrate CMMI, Six Sigma, and all other improvement initiatives to provide a standard for the execution of every project throughout its life cycle.

While the previous three approaches are tactical (i.e., they provide a course of action), this is an approach for setting an organization's strategy. It is longer term and more visionary. It promotes the idea that an organization should take control of its destiny and manage its initiatives rather than be managed by them. Six Sigma methods can be leveraged to design the organization's standard processes, but the focus here is embedding Six Sigma alongside other initiatives in the organizational business and engineering processes.

This approach can be executed at any maturity level, with any maturity level as the end goal. When possible, it's best to start while at low maturity. Many people describe this idea in different ways. It has been called, among other things, "integrated process architecture," "interoperable process architecture," and "internal integrated standard process." Lockheed Martin IS&S labels its approach a "program process standard" [Penn 03].

Regardless of the label, the idea remains the same: the organization establishes a set of standard processes that incorporates all the features of the initiatives of choice. This idea assumes that conscious decisions have been made at the organizational level to adopt these initiatives. Also assumed is that the process is adaptable with time (i.e., capable of iterative refinement) and instrumented and robust to the realities of the organization (e.g., the types of work done and the degree of organizational acquisition).

In addition to Lockheed Martin IS&S, whose mapped program process standard has been presented at a high level at conferences, Northrop Grumman Mission Systems (formerly TRW) has also presented its enterprise strategy showing how it jointly leveraged CMMI, Six Sigma, and other initiatives. Both organizations have made presentations showing how their approach has evolved with time. (See the References and Selected Additional Reading sections for pointers to some of these presentations.)

 

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics

Successfully implementing CMMI and Six Sigma together requires an examination of the relationships between the two. People often create a mapping when comparing another improvement initiative with CMMI. Because CMMI and Six Sigma are two different types of initiatives with many different connections and overlaps, a complete mapping of the "general case" is unwieldy and offers little practical value. What is useful for the general case is to understand their complementary focus and the ways in which they are connected. Coupling this understanding with a conscious strategy enables an organization to create tactical plans and specific mappings to support their implementations.

5.1 Complementary Focus

CMMI is used to create an organizational process infrastructure by addressing particular domains, such as software and systems engineering. Six Sigma is a top-down initiative that cuts across the entire enterprise, including areas such as engineering, sales, marketing, and research. Six Sigma is intended to be implemented with a focus on problems and opportunities, often with narrow scopes, that will yield significant business benefits. It focuses on the performance of processes and practices as implemented rather than checking for compliance against a definition or model. While these two improvement initiatives are different by design, they are interdependent in their use. In practice, a back and forth focus is often effective. For instance, Six Sigma could be used to discover that processes need to be more repeatable, CMMI could be used to institute processes based on community best practice, and then Six Sigma could be used to optimize those processes.

In this integrated approach the high-level synergies between the two become evident. As shown by Rick Hefner in his presentation at the 2005 Software Engineering Process Group Conference, CMMI offers institutionalization features that are lacking in Six Sigma [Hefner 05]. Six Sigma reinforces mission focus, and its enterprise deployment strategy fosters culture change that is supportive of CMMI implementation.

5.2 Relationships Between CMMI Process Areas and the DMAIC Framework

In this section, we focus on connections between DMAIC and the CMMI process areas and include a few notes on connections between Lean's Kaizen Events and the process areas. Remember: just as the CMMI model should be mapped to an organization's processes rather than designing the processes to exactly match the model's practices, DMAIC should be incorporated into the measurement process rather than changing the organization's defined processes to match the steps of DMAIC.

5.2.1 Connection 1: CMMI Process Areas, DMAIC Steps, and Generic Practices

Several CMMI process areas and generic practices align with DMAIC roadmap steps. The diagram in CMMI Process Areas and DMAIC Steps4 shows a flowchart of an organization's overall measurement process, overlaid with DMAIC steps and selected process areas. While this organization's process was designed with model compliance in mind, it represents an integrated approach to the overall use of measurement instead of a replication of the specific practices of each process area. Similarly, this organizational process leverages ideas of DMAIC, but is not a replication of the DMAIC steps.

Figure 4: CMMI Process Areas and DMAIC Steps

Figure 4: CMMI Process Areas and DMAIC Steps

Figure 4: CMMI Process Areas and DMAIC Steps

 

The organization's measurement process could also be mapped to the generic practices that apply to all the CMMI process areas shown. The generic practices that are oriented to this organization's measurement process are listed below.

5.2.2 Connection 2: CMMI Project Management Process Areas and Six Sigma Project Management

The CMMI process areas involving project management can be leveraged in the management of Six Sigma projects. This enables Six Sigma project teams to rely on the organizational norms for things like project launches, resource commitments, and schedule tracking.

The process areas that can be useful in this context are

5.2.3 Connection 3: Incorporating DMAIC Steps Within CMMI-Based Processes

As alluded to in Figure 4, aspects of DMAIC can be incorporated into the fabric of an organization's process. As such, it would become part of the organizational approach and should be documented within Organizational Process Focus (OPF) and Organizational Process Deployment (OPD).

5.2.4 Connection 4: DMAIC-Based Improvement of Process Areas

All CMMI process areas are eligible for DMAIC-based improvement. For instance, the measurement process shown in Figure 4 was created based on CMMI but also contained aspects of DMAIC. The defined process for measurement in that example, and for other processes defined based on each of the other process areas, could also be improved by applying multiple iterations of DMAIC.

5.2.5 Connection 5: Six Sigma Toolkit and CMMI Process Areas

Numerous process areas have links to the Six Sigma analytical toolkit. Some examples are listed below.

Connections can be made between DMAIC roadmap steps (shown earlier in this document) and the specific goals of process areas. Although DMAIC roadmaps vary from organization to organization, we have included one sample of these connections in Appendix A.

For those using Lean by itself or in conjunction with DMAIC or DFSS, the process areas listed below can be connected with Kaizen Events.

The connections we have listed in this section are not exhaustive. We invite you to contact us with other differences, synergies, and thematic connections between CMMI and Six Sigma that you have leveraged in your work.

5.3 Staged and Continuous Views

When considering the implementation of Six Sigma alongside a staged implementation of CMMI, you may wonder what a Six Sigma implementation might look like for an organization at a lower maturity level. Before addressing this question, we will first consider what happens to many organizations when transitioning from CMM Maturity Level 3 to CMMI or moving from lower to higher maturity. Often the organization discovers that its measurement infrastructure and associated skill base in analysis methods is not sufficient for its new goal. Going back to the drawing board is not unheard of.

This situation is not unique to software engineering and shows the need for finding a balance between a top-down policy to "do measurement" and bottoms-up foundation building through small wins and successes. Building a strong foundation for a transition to CMMI or a move to high maturity involves the use of available data to improve processes long before the model says you have to. When at a lower maturity level, this selective improvement likely means conducting improvement projects in subsets of the organization, for instance in a specific development project, group, or product line. These projects can be managed as pilots for potential institutionalization across the organization.

If Six Sigma is included in the strategy to improve an organization's processes, Six Sigma philosophy, frameworks, and toolkits can all be leveraged. Even its measures can be used, although they may not reflect organizational performance (yet). And, if Six Sigma project portfolio management and methods are being employed, there is reasonable assurance that local improvements are value-added for the organization, not just isolated exercises that will not contribute to the greater good. As such, there is a greater likelihood that the efforts will accelerate the CMMI solution because people will gain experience with the effective use of measurement and analysis to gain control of a situation and possibly optimize a process, albeit a local one. CMMI-compliant processes may be piloted and refined as part of individual project efforts. As an organization scales the maturity ladder, the use of Six Sigma can continue, but Six Sigma projects can be applied across organizational processes. Then, what was being done at low maturity in a local fashion is now used across the organization.

Figure 5 shows how Six Sigma can be used at each maturity level, starting as a driving force and accelerator at Level 1 and progressing to the organization-wide application of what were originally local improvements when Level 5 is reached.

Figure 5: CMMI Staged Representation and Six Sigma

Figure 5: CMMI Staged Representation and Six Sigma

A similar approach can be used in a continuous implementation of CMMI. One approach is to use Six Sigma to drive improvement or process design associated with each process area that has been selected for implementation. In this approach, Six Sigma assumes the role of "tactical engine" within CMMI implementation.

As an alternative to using Six Sigma as a tactical engine, an organization could use Six Sigma thinking to establish its highest priority issues and the requisite process areas that need to be implemented to solve them. Doing this successfully might prompt an organization to develop its capability in process areas that are tightly coupled with Six Sigma skills and methods, including MA, QPM, and CAR. This capability, in turn, could be used to prioritize remaining process areas, using data analysis to substantiate the prioritization. Figure 6 shows a possible scenario that could result when Six Sigma is used to prioritize issues and decide the order of implementation of the CMMI process areas.

Figure 6: CMMI Continuous Representation and Six Sigma: A Possible Scenario
Remaining PAs ordered by business factors, improvement opportunity, and so forth, which are better understood using foundational capabilities. CMMI Staged groupings and DMAIC vs. DMADV (Define, Measure, Analyze, Design, Verify) are also factors that may drive the remaining order.10

Figure 6: CMMI Continuous Representation and Six Sigma: A Possible Scenario

 

 

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

6 Conclusions

In today's highly competitive environment, it is more crucial than ever for organizations to invest in process improvement to serve their missions, not as an exercise in compliance. Many organizations wisely realize that they don't have to invent their process improvement effort from scratch: they can leverage existing, demonstrated improvement initiatives and practices. However, they often find themselves in "initiative overload." Those responsible for rolling out organizational process improvement efforts must design their implementation strategy and tactics so that the multiple initiatives chosen interoperate.

Determining what is appropriate requires an understanding of the selected initiatives and their differences, synergies, and connections. While some models can be mapped where one model subsumes the other, CMMI and Six Sigma cannot because they are different types of models. Their joint deployment is synergistic. The potential value that is added is the accelerated achievement of performance goals, accelerated achievement of CMMI adoption (as a "meta goal" toward performance), stronger foundational measurement and analysis skills to enable better quantification of results, and all of the corresponding culture change that goes along with these improvements [Bergey 04].

While the quantity and depth of publications and presentations about CMMI and Six Sigma have greatly increased over the past four years, this is still an emerging topic. We invite your feedback on the thoughts we have shared in this document. Please send your comments to customer-relations@sei.cmu.edu.

 

 

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

Appendix A DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices

Following are lists of specific goals (listed by number, not name) that reflect similar intent to DMAIC roadmap steps. This list is provided as a simple cross-reference which an organization may choose to use as a guide while defining its processes

 

 

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

References

[Chrissis 03]

Chrissis, Mary Beth; Konrad, Mike; & Shrum, Sandy. CMMI: Guidelines for Process Integration and Product Improvement. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley, 2003.

[Hefner 05]

Hefner, Rick. "Using Six Sigma to Accelerate CMMI Adoption (and Vice Versa)." Presented at the Software Engineering Process Group Conference, Seattle, WA, March 7-10, 2005.

[Penn 03]

Penn, M. Lynn & Siviy, Jeannine. "Integrating CMMI and Six Sigma in Software and Systems Engineering." Presented at the Software Engineering Process Group Conference, Boston, MA, February 24-27, 2003.

[Bergey 04]

Bergey, John, et al. Results of SEI Independent Research and Development Projects and Report on Emerging Technologies and Technology Trends, Chapter 5 (CMU/SEI-2004-TR-018). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2004.
 

 

 

 

 

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

Selected Additional Reading

[Facemire 04]

Facemire, Jeff & Silva, Hortensia. "Experiences with Leveraging Six Sigma to Implement CMMI Levels 4 and 5." Presented at the Software Engineering Process Group Conference, Orlando, FL, March 8-11, 2004.

[Siviy 05]

Siviy, Jeannine & Hallowell, David L. "Bridging the Gap Between CMMI and Six Sigma Training." Presented at the Software Engineering Process Group Conference, Seattle, WA, March 7-10, 2005.

[Hefner 03]

Hefner, Rick & Ulrich, Ron. "Minimizing SCAMPI Costs via Quantitative Methods." Presented at the CMMI Users Group Conference, November 18-20, 2003.

[Hefner 04]

Hefner, Rick & Caccavo, Dean. "CMMI Benefits at Northrop Grumman Mission Systems." Presented at the Software Engineering Process Group Conference, Orlando, FL, March 8-11, 2004.

[Stoddard 00]

Stoddard, Robert W. "Implementing Six Sigma in Software." Presented at the Software Engineering Symposium, Pittsburgh, PA, May 20, 2000. Available to SEIR contributors at http://seir.sei.cmu.edu

[Wipro 04]

Subramanyam, V.; Deb, Sambuddha; Krishnaswamy, Priya; & Ghosh, Rituparna. An Integrated Approach to Software Process Improvement at Wipro Technologies: veloci-Q (CMU/SEI-2004-TR-006). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2004.

 

1SEPGs work with organizations to improve process quality by helping to assess current status, plan and implement improvements, and transfer technology to facilitate improvement in practice. For more information about SEPGs, see the Software Engineering Process Group Guide.

2Lean is a process in which waste--activities a customer would not want to pay for or that add no value to the product or service from the customer's perspective--are identified and eliminated. Lean Thinking by James Womack and Daniel T. Jones explains the principles of Lean.

3For more information about Kaizen Events, see http://www.isixsigma.com/dictionary/Kaizen_Event-411.htm.

4GQIM is a method that translates informal goals into executable measurement structures. See Goal-Driven Software Measurement--A Guidebook.

5PSM is an information-driven measurement process that addresses the unique technical and business goals of an organization. For more information, see http://www.psmsc.com.

6Bayesian modeling uses probability methods to remove meaningless relationships in a model and quantify the meaningful ones. For more information, see http://research.microsoft.com/adapt/MSBNx/msbnx/Basics_of_Bayesian_Inference.htm.

7There are also misconceptions about CMMI. For more information, see "CMMI Myths and Realities."

8Pugh's concept is a selection technique, set up in a matrix format, which assists in evaluating and synthesizing concept alternatives. See http://www.isixsigma.com/dictionary/Pugh_Matrix-384.htm for more information.

9FMEA is an engineering quality method that helps you to identify and counter weak points in the early conception phase of products and processes.

10The idea to strategically select these process areas as the first in which to achieve Level 5 was offered by Robert Vickroy, ABS Group, during a CMMI course in 2003. The idea has evolved through subsequent conversations as part of courses, conferences, and collaborations.

 

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]   [4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]   [References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]

Unlimited distribution subject to the copyright.

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

The Software Engineering Institute is a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense.

Copyright 2005 Carnegie Mellon University.

NO WARRANTY

THIS CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE MATERIAL IS FURNISHED ON AN "AS-IS" BASIS. CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY MAKES NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, AS TO ANY MATTER INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR PURPOSE OR MERCHANTABILITY, 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.

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

Internal use. Permission to reproduce this document and to prepare derivative works from this document for internal use is granted, provided the copyright and "No Warranty" statements are included with all reproductions and derivative works.

External use. Requests for permission to reproduce this document or prepare derivative works of this document for external and commercial use should be addressed to the SEI Licensing Agent.

This work was created in the performance of Federal Government Contract Number F19628-00-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 252.227-7013.

For information about purchasing paper copies of SEI reports, please visit the publications portion of our Web site (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/pubweb.html).

 

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.

1. agency use only

(Leave Blank)

2. report date

December 2005

3. report type and dates covered

Final

4. title and subtitle

Relationships Between CMMI and Six Sigma

5. funding numbers

FA8721-05-C-0003

6. author(s)

Jeannine Siviy, M. Lynn Penn, Erin Harper

7. performing organization name(s) and address(es)

Software Engineering Institute
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213

8. performing organization
report number

CMU/SEI-2005-TN-005

9. sponsoring/monitoring agency name(s) and address(es)

HQ ESC/XPK
5 Eglin Street
Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-2116

10. sponsoring/monitoring agency report number

11. supplementary notes

12a distribution/availability statement

Unclassified/Unlimited, DTIC, NTIS

12b distribution code

13. abstract (maximum 200 words)

Organizations that endeavor to improve their processes often find themselves juggling many approaches to achieve that improvement. To be most effective, all improvement initiatives selected should be implemented in an integrated fashion, not as layered or stovepiped efforts. This document focuses on the joint use of two popular improvement initiatives: Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMI®) and Six Sigma.

Successfully implementing CMMI and Six Sigma together requires an understanding of the relationships between the two. This report contains a brief summary of each initiative and then outlines the connections between frameworks commonly used in Six Sigma and the CMMI process areas. Coupling this knowledge with a conscious strategy enables an organization to create tactical plans and specific mappings to support implementation. Example strategies and tactics that organizations have used to integrate these initiatives are also provided.

14. subject terms

Six Sigma, DMAIC, CMMI

15. number of pages

38

16. price code

17. security classification of report

Unclassified

18. security classification of this page

Unclassified

19. security classification of abstract

Unclassified

20. limitation of abstract

UL

NSN 7540-01-280-5500

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18 298-102

[Abstract]   [1 Introduction]   [2 Overview of CMMI]   [3 Overview of Six Sigma]  
[4 Integrating CMIM & Six Sigma: Strategies]   [5 Integrating CMMI & Six Sigma: Tactics]  
[6 Conclusions]   [Appendix A: DMAIC Connections to Specific Goals and Generic Practices]  
[References]   [Selected Additional Reading]   [PDF File]