Abstract
In the past, many software companies have reported benefits in productivity and quality by using quality improvement initiatives. CMMI is one such initiative that has gained much success over a long period. OPM3 is a recent addition to the list of maturity models. CMMI is the software process improvement model proposed by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) and OPM3 is the project management maturity model proposed by the Project Management Institute (PMI). This paper aims to analyze the compatibility of these two models from both theoretical and practical perspectives. As a first step towards the comparative analysis, a detailed one-to-one mapping of all the practices of the two models was carried out. The overlapping and differentiating factors of CMMI and OPM3 were identified. The analysis was undertaken in the hope of finding synergy between maturity models of two different domains proposed by these two world-renowned organizations. In order to validate the results observed, an OPM3 assessment was carried out for a CMMI-appraised software house. The assessment verified the results that were observed during the comparative analysis. The objective of this study was to find out the strengths and weaknesses of each maturity model so that organizations interested in gaining maturity can reap maximum benefit by the application of any one or both of these models. Hence, the objective of the study was successfully achieved.
Chapter PDF
References
Software Engineering Institute: CMMI staged-version 1.1 (2002), http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/
Project Management Institute: Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3) Knowledge Foundation. Project Management Institute Inc. Newton Square. Pennsylvania 2003. opm3.pmi.org (2003)
Philips, B.: CMMI and OPM3 presentation (2005)
Bert, D.R., Yael, G.C., Lockett, M., Calderini, S.R., Moura, M., Sloper, A.: The impact of project portfolio management on information technology projects. International Journal of Project Management 23(2005), 524–537 (2005)
Bradley, M.: CMMI and OPM3. Montgomery PMI Chapter Meeting, The Cahaba Group (2004)
Keuton, T.: CMMI and OPM3 A Powerful Combination for Increasing Organizational Maturity (2005), http://www.projectmagazine.com/v5i4/cmmi.html
Cooke-Davies, T.J., Arzymanow, A.: The maturity of project management in different industries: An investigation into variations between project management models. International Journal of Project Management 21, 471–478 (2003)
Eman, K.E., Madhavgi, N.H.: Does Organizational Maturity improve quality? IEEE Software, 109–110 (1996)
Hillson, D.: Benchmarking organizational project management capability. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Project Management Institute 2001 Seminars and Symposium. Project Management Institute, Nashville (2001)
Mendez, Y.B.: Project Management for Software Process Improvement. In: Proceedings of Project Management Institute Global Progress, Prague, Czech Republic, Project Management Institute (2004)
Kerzner, H.: Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling, pp. 313–314. John Wiley and Sons, New York (1998)
Software Engineering Institute: CMMI staged-version 1.1, pp. 24 (2002), http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/
Project Management Institute: A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge, pp. 220–221. PMI publication Division, Sylvia, NC (1996)
Futrell, R.T., Shafer, D.F., Shafer, L.I.: Quality Software Project Management, p. 136. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2002)
Garcia, S.: How standards enable adoption of project management practices. In: IEEE Software. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Nazar, S., Abbasi, E. (2008). CMMI and OPM3: Are They Compatible?. In: Hussain, D.M.A., Rajput, A.Q.K., Chowdhry, B.S., Gee, Q. (eds) Wireless Networks, Information Processing and Systems. IMTIC 2008. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 20. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89853-5_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89853-5_25
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-89852-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-89853-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)