Agile Maturity Model: Oxymoron or the Next Level of Understanding

Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 290)


From the agile camp you can hear someone to say that CMMI is the big American waterfall model monster, and is outright contra productive to agile methods. From the CMMI camp you can hear someone to say that agile methods is hackers from hell that uses the agile paradigm to enjoy anarchy with no rules. You can also hear some say that agile works the best in CMMI level 5 companies. The context of the dilemma however is slightly awkward. CMMI describes characteristics of good development practices, and agile is a lifecycle concept. So from a meta point of view they can easily co-exist. We would like to state that they do, and that you need both to support the best development performance. Starting in December 2011 three surveys were launched to get an idea about what could an agile maturity model deliver and what might be its added value. 67 Participants from several agile or/and CMMI® related LinkedIn Groups contributed to the survey. This article explains the survey results and proposes further research topics and harmonization actions.


Agile CMMI Maturity models 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    CMMI Product Team. CMMI for development, version 1.3. Software Engineering Institute, CMU/SEI- TR-2010- 033, Pittsburgh, PA, USA (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ambler, S.: The Agile Maturity Model (AMM) (web publishing),
  3. 3.
    Anderson, D.J.: Agile Management for Software Engineering, Applying the theory of constraints for business results. Prentice Hall (2004) (web publishing)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Banerjee, U.: Agile Maturity Model – Three Different Approaches (web publishing)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Benefield, R.: Seven Dimensions of Agile Maturity in the Global Enterprise: A Case Study. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences – 2010 (2010) (web publishing)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Humble, J., Russell, R.: The Agile Maturity Model Applied to Building and Releasing Software. ThoughtWorks White Paper (web publishing)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jayaraj, S.: The Agile Maturity Model (web Publishing)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kuvaja, P., Simila, J., Krzanik, L., Bicego, A., Saukkonen, S., Koch, G.: Software Process Assessment & Improvement, The BOOTSTRAP Approach. Blackwell, Oxford (1994)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Patel, C., Ramachandran, M.: Agile Maturity Model (AMM): A Software Process Improvement framework for Agile Software Development Practices. Int. J. of Software Engineering, IJSE 2(1), 3–28 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Proulx, M.: Yet Another Agile Maturity Model (AMM) – The 5 Levels of Maturity (web publishing)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SQS CologneGermany
  2. 2.FiSMA (Finnish Software Measurement Association)HelsinkiFinland
  3. 3.DeltaCopenhagenDenmark
  4. 4.Software Competence Center Hagenberg GmbHHagenbergAustria

Personalised recommendations