Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: CMMI rating - conflict of interest

Expand Messages
  • rick
    Ed, Expertise and experience is meaningless when there is a conflict of interest, i.e., the same person on the payroll for the rating. This is Orhan s point.
    Message 1 of 20 , May 10, 2012
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Ed,

      Expertise and experience is meaningless when there is a conflict of interest, i.e., the same person on the payroll for the rating. This is Orhan's point.

      rick


      From: efwelleraol <edwardfwelleriii@...>
      To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, May 7, 2012 4:41 PM
      Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: CMMI rating - conflict of interest

       
      Orhan

      Your proposal would not allow organizations to opt for a different maximum level of service.

      There are differing areas of expertise and experience and an organizaiton should be able to search for and retain the ATL of their choice.

      --- In cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com, Orhan KALAYCI <orhan.kalayci@...> wrote:
      >
      > Ed,
      >
      > For SCAMPI A, all LAs should be providing the same minimum level for
      > services in ensuring that an official level of CMMI claimed by OU is really
      > there.
      >
      > If I were an acquirer of services and/or products of an org and I had
      > chosen to work with that org based on its official CMMI level, I would like
      > SEI to ensure me an official level announced in its site means something.
      > Did I demand too much? Hope not!
      >
      > Cheers,
      > Orhan
      >
      > On Wednesday, May 2, 2012, EDWARD F WELLER III <edwardfwelleriii@...>
      > wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > Pat, Rob, Larry, Jeff
      > >
      > > Agree with the points you have all made.
      > >
      > > Any dispatching system would have to assume all Lead Appraisers are the
      > same (assuming all consumers of LA services expect the same level of
      > service). As much as I respect the 4 of you and others, I would not want to
      > be a clone :- ) .
      > >
      > > Ed
      > >
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: rob.leinen
      > > To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 8:00 AM
      > > Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: CMMI rating - conflict of interest
      > >
      > >
      > > Jeff,
      > >
      > > I agree with all of your points. I would add to your last statement. One
      > of the unintended consequences of awarding maturity ratings was that it
      > would become table stakes for companies to get systems integration and
      > application development work (i.e., don't come knocking if you're not this
      > level or that level); particularly in the government sector. Once software
      > vendors discovered that they needed the maturity rating to stay in
      > business, for them the SCAMPI-A became as much a "certification" (wrong
      > word I know) exercise as a tool for organizational process improvement;
      > which has led to some improprieties. Are these improprieties as wide spread
      > as some would like us to believe? I hope not, but I wouldn't know. I do
      > know that allocating SCAMPI-A work, using the SEI as the dispatcher, and
      > putting the SEI in the position of dictating appraisal rates is clearly not
      > the answer.
      > >
      > > Cheers,
      > > Rob L.
      > >
      > > --- In cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Dalton <jeff@>
      > wrote:
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> There are many reasons to choose between A/B/C appraisals, and they
      > can't be wrapped up in a tidy single sentence. An "A" is more rigorous than
      > a B or and C and provides a more detailed and precise analysis, in addition
      > to "providing a level."
      > >>
      > >> I personally have walked away from more than a few potential clients
      > that were not prepared but insisted that I proceed (I did so just last
      > week), and I have advised even more to not continue with a SCAMPI A that
      > they have requested. In both examples, I "lost business." This is more
      > common than people think and yet people seem to want to focus on the few
      > bad examples they hear of. I'm not convinced that there is a problem to be
      > solved here - at least not in North America where I am most familiar.
      > >>
      > >> Appraisal ratings are determined by consensus of an entire team - not by
      > the Lead Appraiser. My experience has been that teams are sometimes harder
      > on their colleagues than the Lead Appraiser is! And those teams aren't
      > looking for "repeat business."
      > >>
      > >> The SEI is well aware of how companies use CMMI and SCAMPI appraisals,
      > and I think they have taken appropriate steps to manage conflict of
      > interest. They are not a police force, nor are they equipped to be one.
      > >>
      > >> But Mike makes the salient point - the purpose of CMMI is to be used as
      > a guide for improvement, not a vehicle for "certification." A certain
      > segment of customers has created THAT perception.
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> Regards,
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> Jeff Dalton, President
      > >> Broadsword Solutions Corporation
      > >> jeff@
      > >> 248-341-3367 (office)
      > >> 248-709-4775 (cell)
      > >>
      > >> Certified SCAMPI Lead Appraiser
      > >> Certified "Introduction to CMMI" Instructor
      > >> Certified "CMMI Maturity Level 2 for Practitioners" Instructor
      > >> SCAMPI Team Leader
      > >> Chairman, SEI Partner Advisory Board
      > >>
      > >> Visit our website at: http://www.broadswordsolutions.com
      > >>
      > >> Visit Jeff's Blog at: www.asktheCMMIAppraiser.com
      > >>
      > >> Follow Jeff on Twitter: CMMIAppraiser
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> On Apr 28, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Orhan KALAYCI wrote:
      > >>
      > >> > Mike,
      > >> >
      > >> >
      > >> > I think you are right that the purpose of SCAMPI A is still to help
      > organizations improve. However, I am not sure if it really makes sense.
      > Because the use of SCAMPI A is totally di
      > >
      > >
      >



    • EDWARD F WELLER III
      ATL - Appraisal Team Leader There are 2 issues Conflict of interest that leads to unethical behavior (COI does not mean there will be unethical behavior) and
      Message 2 of 20 , May 14, 2012
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        
        ATL - Appraisal Team Leader
         
        There are 2 issues
        Conflict of interest that leads to unethical behavior (COI does not mean there will be unethical behavior) and there are cases where COI is inevitable - the MDD asks that COI be documented and addressed in the appraisal plan
         
        the 2nd point that I was addressing was that assignment of ATLs will lead to misfits of ATLs to orgs, and would not allow orgs to select an ATL they believe could really help them vs just lead an appraisal. 
         
        I would offer that anyone "on the payroll for the rating" will find a way to cheat regardless of the mechanisms put in place to stop it unless there is direct on the scene auditing which would be (too) costly. Having said that, cheating organizations (takes 2 to cheat) will pay for a chimera
         
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: rick
        Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 2:46 PM
        Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: CMMI rating - conflict of interest

         

        Ed,

        Expertise and experience is meaningless when there is a conflict of interest, i.e., the same person on the payroll for the rating. This is Orhan's point.

        rick


        From: efwelleraol <edwardfwelleriii@...>
        To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Monday, May 7, 2012 4:41 PM
        Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: CMMI rating - conflict of interest

         
        Orhan

        Your proposal would not allow organizations to opt for a different maximum level of service.

        There are differing areas of expertise and experience and an organizaiton should be able to search for and retain the ATL of their choice.

        --- In cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com, Orhan KALAYCI <orhan.kalayci@...> wrote:
        >
        > Ed,
        >
        > For SCAMPI A, all LAs should be providing the same minimum level for
        > services in ensuring that an official level of CMMI claimed by OU is really
        > there.
        >
        > If I were an acquirer of services and/or products of an org and I had
        > chosen to work with that org based on its official CMMI level, I would like
        > SEI to ensure me an official level announced in its site means something.
        > Did I demand too much? Hope not!
        >
        > Cheers,
        > Orhan
        >
        > On Wednesday, May 2, 2012, EDWARD F WELLER III <edwardfwelleriii@...>
        > wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > Pat, Rob, Larry, Jeff
        > >
        > > Agree with the points you have all made.
        > >
        > > Any dispatching system would have to assume all Lead Appraisers are the
        > same (assuming all consumers of LA services expect the same level of
        > service). As much as I respect the 4 of you and others, I would not want to
        > be a clone :- ) .
        > >
        > > Ed
        > >
        > >
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: rob.leinen
        > > To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
        > > Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 8:00 AM
        > > Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: CMMI rating - conflict of interest
        > >
        > >
        > > Jeff,
        > >
        > > I agree with all of your points. I would add to your last statement. One
        > of the unintended consequences of awarding maturity ratings was that it
        > would become table stakes for companies to get systems integration and
        > application development work (i.e., don't come knocking if you're not this
        > level or that level); particularly in the government sector. Once software
        > vendors discovered that they needed the maturity rating to stay in
        > business, for them the SCAMPI-A became as much a "certification" (wrong
        > word I know) exercise as a tool for organizational process improvement;
        > which has led to some improprieties. Are these improprieties as wide spread
        > as some would like us to believe? I hope not, but I wouldn't know. I do
        > know that allocating SCAMPI-A work, using the SEI as the dispatcher, and
        > putting the SEI in the position of dictating appraisal rates is clearly not
        > the answer.
        > >
        > > Cheers,
        > > Rob L.
        > >
        > > --- In cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Dalton <jeff@>
        > wrote:
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> There are many reasons to choose between A/B/C appraisals, and they
        > can't be wrapped up in a tidy single sentence. An "A" is more rigorous than
        > a B or and C and provides a more detailed and precise analysis, in addition
        > to "providing a level."
        > >>
        > >> I personally have walked away from more than a few potential clients
        > that were not prepared but insisted that I proceed (I did so just last
        > week), and I have advised even more to not continue with a SCAMPI A that
        > they have requested. In both examples, I "lost business." This is more
        > common than people think and yet people seem to want to focus on the few
        > bad examples they hear of. I'm not convinced that there is a problem to be
        > solved here - at least not in North America where I am most familiar.
        > >>
        > >> Appraisal ratings are determined by consensus of an entire team - not by
        > the Lead Appraiser. My experience has been that teams are sometimes harder
        > on their colleagues than the Lead Appraiser is! And those teams aren't
        > looking for "repeat business."
        > >>
        > >> The SEI is well aware of how companies use CMMI and SCAMPI appraisals,
        > and I think they have taken appropriate steps to manage conflict of
        > interest. They are not a police force, nor are they equipped to be one.
        > >>
        > >> But Mike makes the salient point - the purpose of CMMI is to be used as
        > a guide for improvement, not a vehicle for "certification." A certain
        > segment of customers has created THAT perception.
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> Regards,
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> Jeff Dalton, President
        > >> Broadsword Solutions Corporation
        > >> jeff@
        > >> 248-341-3367 (office)
        > >> 248-709-4775 (cell)
        > >>
        > >> Certified SCAMPI Lead Appraiser
        > >> Certified "Introduction to CMMI" Instructor
        > >> Certified "CMMI Maturity Level 2 for Practitioners" Instructor
        > >> SCAMPI Team Leader
        > >> Chairman, SEI Partner Advisory Board
        > >>
        > >> Visit our website at: http://www.broadswordsolutions.com
        > >>
        > >> Visit Jeff's Blog at: www.asktheCMMIAppraiser.com
        > >>
        > >> Follow Jeff on Twitter: CMMIAppraiser
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> On Apr 28, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Orhan KALAYCI wrote:
        > >>
        > >> > Mike,
        > >> >
        > >> >
        > >> > I think you are right that the purpose of SCAMPI A is still to help
        > organizations improve. However, I am not sure if it really makes sense.
        > Because the use of SCAMPI A is totally di
        > >
        > >
        >



      • Garg, Vaibhav(Genus, Asst. Manager)
        Rick, ATL is Appraisal Team Leader, in other words the LA(Lead appraiser). Best Regards Vaibhav Garg From: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
        Message 3 of 20 , May 14, 2012
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment

          Rick,

          ATL is Appraisal Team Leader, in other words the LA(Lead appraiser).

           

          Best Regards

          Vaibhav Garg

           

          From: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of rick
          Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 03:12
          To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] CMMI rating - conflict of interest

           

           

          Ed,

           

          What's a ATL?

           

          rick

           


          From: EDWARD F WELLER III <edwardfwelleriii@...>
          To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 9:42 PM
          Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] CMMI rating - conflict of interest

           

           

          

          Orhan

           

          You also overlook the other side of the coin with your "assigned by SEI ATL", that there are companies that ATLs prefer not to work with. What would happen if an ATL declined an assignment. I decline to bid on RFQs on a regular basis (location, doesn't feel right, etc)

           

          Ed

          ----- Original Message -----

          Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 6:52 PM

          Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] CMMI rating - conflict of interest

           

           

          Ed,

          For SCAMPI A, all LAs should be providing the same minimum level for services in ensuring that an official level of CMMI claimed by OU is really there.

          If I were an acquirer of services and/or products of an org and I had chosen to work with that org based on its official CMMI level, I would like SEI to ensure me an official level announced in its site means something.  Did I demand too much?  Hope not!  

          Cheers,
          Orhan

          On Wednesday, May 2, 2012, EDWARD F WELLER III <edwardfwelleriii@...> wrote:
          >  
          >
          > Pat, Rob, Larry, Jeff
          >  
          > Agree with the points you have all made.
          >  
          > Any dispatching system would have to assume all Lead Appraisers are the same (assuming all consumers of LA services expect the same level of service). As much as I respect the 4 of you and others, I would not want to be a clone :- ) .
          >  
          > Ed
          >  
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: rob.leinen
          > To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
          > Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 8:00 AM
          > Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: CMMI rating - conflict of interest
          >  
          >
          > Jeff,
          >
          > I agree with all of your points. I would add to your last statement. One of the unintended consequences of awarding maturity ratings was that it would become table stakes for companies to get systems integration and application development work (i.e., don't come knocking if you're not this level or that level); particularly in the government sector. Once software vendors discovered that they needed the maturity rating to stay in business, for them the SCAMPI-A became as much a "certification" (wrong word I know) exercise as a tool for organizational process improvement; which has led to some improprieties. Are these improprieties as wide spread as some would like us to believe? I hope not, but I wouldn't know. I do know that allocating SCAMPI-A work, using the SEI as the dispatcher, and putting the SEI in the position of dictating appraisal rates is clearly not the answer.
          >
          > Cheers,
          > Rob L.
          >
          > --- In cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Dalton <jeff@...> wrote:
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >> There are many reasons to choose between A/B/C appraisals, and they can't be wrapped up in a tidy single sentence. An "A" is more rigorous than a B or and C and provides a more detailed and precise analysis, in addition to "providing a level."
          >>
          >> I personally have walked away from more than a few potential clients that were not prepared but insisted that I proceed (I did so just last week), and I have advised even more to not continue with a SCAMPI A that they have requested. In both examples, I "lost business." This is more common than people think and yet people seem to want to focus on the few bad examples they hear of. I'm not convinced that there is a problem to be solved here - at least not in North America where I am most familiar.
          >>
          >> Appraisal ratings are determined by consensus of an entire team - not by the Lead Appraiser. My experience has been that teams are sometimes harder on their colleagues than the Lead Appraiser is! And those teams aren't looking for "repeat business."
          >>
          >> The SEI is well aware of how companies use CMMI and SCAMPI appraisals, and I think they have taken appropriate steps to manage conflict of interest. They are not a police force, nor are they equipped to be one.
          >>
          >> But Mike makes the salient point - the purpose of CMMI is to be used as a guide for improvement, not a vehicle for "certification." A certain segment of customers has created THAT perception.
          >>
          >>
          >> Regards,
          >>
          >>
          >> Jeff Dalton, President
          >> Broadsword Solutions Corporation
          >> jeff@...
          >> 248-341-3367 (office)
          >> 248-709-4775 (cell)
          >>
          >> Certified SCAMPI Lead Appraiser
          >> Certified "Introduction to CMMI" Instructor
          >> Certified "CMMI Maturity Level 2 for Practitioners" Instructor
          >> SCAMPI Team Leader
          >> Chairman, SEI Partner Advisory Board
          >>
          >> Visit our website at: http://www.broadswordsolutions.com
          >>
          >> Visit Jeff's Blog at: www.asktheCMMIAppraiser.com
          >>
          >> Follow Jeff on Twitter: CMMIAppraiser
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >> On Apr 28, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Orhan KALAYCI wrote:
          >>
          >> > Mike,
          >> >
          >> >
          >> > I think you are right that the purpose of SCAMPI A is still to help organizations improve. However, I am not sure if it really makes sense. Because the use of SCAMPI A is totally di
          >
          >

           

          
          Email Confidentiality Notice and Disclaimer
          This email message contains information which may be confidential and or legally privileged. Unless you are the intended recipient (or have been authorized to receive on behalf of the intended recipient), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message or from any attachments that were sent with this email. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender by email, and delete the message. Further, this message contains views and comments of the individual sending the message and the company is in no way liable for any issues arising from use from such a message.
          
          ----------------------------------------------
          Genus Power Infrastructures Ltd, Jaipur, India
          
          
        • dagreergad
          Rick, Appraisal Team Lead (Certified SCAMPI Lead Appraiser) they re synonymous. David Greer
          Message 4 of 20 , May 15, 2012
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Rick,

            Appraisal Team Lead (Certified SCAMPI Lead Appraiser) they're synonymous.

            David Greer

            --- In cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com, rick <trueman99@...> wrote:
            >
            > Ed,
            >
            > What's a ATL?
            >
            > rick
            >
            >
            > ________________________________
            > From: EDWARD F WELLER III <edwardfwelleriii@...>
            > To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 9:42 PM
            > Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] CMMI rating - conflict of interest
            >
            >
            >  
            > 
            > Orhan
            >  
            > You also overlook the other side of the coin with your "assigned by SEI
            > ATL", that there are companies that ATLs prefer not to work with. What would
            > happen if an ATL declined an assignment. I decline to bid on RFQs on a regular
            > basis (location, doesn't feel right, etc)
            >  
            > Ed
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > >From: Orhan KALAYCI
            > >To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
            > >Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 6:52 PM
            > >Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] CMMI rating - conflict of interest
            > >
            > > 
            > >Ed,
            > >
            > >For SCAMPI A, all LAs should be providing the same minimum
            > level for services in ensuring that an official level of CMMI claimed by OU is
            > really there.
            > >
            > >If I were an acquirer of services and/or products of an
            > org and I had chosen to work with that org based on its official CMMI level, I
            > would like SEI to ensure me an official level announced in its site means
            > something.  Did I demand too much?  Hope not!
            >  
            > >
            > >Cheers,
            > >Orhan
            > >
            > >On Wednesday, May 2, 2012, EDWARD F
            > WELLER III <edwardfwelleriii@...> wrote:
            > >>  
            > >>
            > >> Pat, Rob, Larry, Jeff
            > >>
            >  
            > >> Agree with the points you have all made.
            > >>  
            > >>
            > Any dispatching system would have to assume all Lead Appraisers are the same
            > (assuming all consumers of LA services expect the same level of service). As
            > much as I respect the 4 of you and others, I would not want to be a clone :- )
            > .
            > >>  
            > >> Ed
            > >>  
            > >>
            > >> ----- Original
            > Message -----
            > >> From: rob.leinen
            > >> To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
            > >>
            > Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 8:00 AM
            > >> Subject: [CMMi Process
            > Improvement] Re: CMMI rating - conflict of interest
            > >>
            >  
            > >>
            > >> Jeff,
            > >>
            > >> I agree with all of your points.
            > I would add to your last statement. One of the unintended consequences of
            > awarding maturity ratings was that it would become table stakes for companies
            > to get systems integration and application development work (i.e., don't come
            > knocking if you're not this level or that level); particularly in the
            > government sector. Once software vendors discovered that they needed the
            > maturity rating to stay in business, for them the SCAMPI-A became as much a
            > "certification" (wrong word I know) exercise as a tool for organizational
            > process improvement; which has led to some improprieties. Are these
            > improprieties as wide spread as some would like us to believe? I hope not, but
            > I wouldn't know. I do know that allocating SCAMPI-A work, using the SEI as the
            > dispatcher, and putting the SEI in the position of dictating appraisal rates
            > is clearly not the answer.
            > >>
            > >> Cheers,
            > >> Rob
            > L.
            > >>
            > >> --- In cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Dalton <jeff@> wrote:
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>> There are many reasons
            > to choose between A/B/C appraisals, and they can't be wrapped up in a tidy
            > single sentence. An "A" is more rigorous than a B or and C and provides a more
            > detailed and precise analysis, in addition to "providing a
            > level."
            > >>>
            > >>> I personally have walked away from more than a
            > few potential clients that were not prepared but insisted that I proceed (I
            > did so just last week), and I have advised even more to not continue with a
            > SCAMPI A that they have requested. In both examples, I "lost business." This
            > is more common than people think and yet people seem to want to focus on the
            > few bad examples they hear of. I'm not convinced that there is a problem to be
            > solved here - at least not in North America where I am most
            > familiar.
            > >>>
            > >>> Appraisal ratings are determined by
            > consensus of an entire team - not by the Lead Appraiser. My experience has
            > been that teams are sometimes harder on their colleagues than the Lead
            > Appraiser is! And those teams aren't looking for "repeat
            > business."
            > >>>
            > >>> The SEI is well aware of how companies use
            > CMMI and SCAMPI appraisals, and I think they have taken appropriate steps to
            > manage conflict of interest. They are not a police force, nor are they
            > equipped to be one.
            > >>>
            > >>> But Mike makes the salient point -
            > the purpose of CMMI is to be used as a guide for improvement, not a vehicle
            > for "certification." A certain segment of customers has created THAT
            > perception.
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > Regards,
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>> Jeff Dalton,
            > President
            > >>> Broadsword Solutions Corporation
            > >>>
            > jeff@
            > >>> 248-341-3367 (office)
            > >>> 248-709-4775
            > (cell)
            > >>>
            > >>> Certified SCAMPI Lead Appraiser
            > >>>
            > Certified "Introduction to CMMI" Instructor
            > >>> Certified "CMMI
            > Maturity Level 2 for Practitioners" Instructor
            > >>> SCAMPI Team
            > Leader
            > >>> Chairman, SEI Partner Advisory
            > Board
            > >>>
            > >>> Visit our website at: http://www.broadswordsolutions.com
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > Visit Jeff's Blog at: www.asktheCMMIAppraiser.com
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > Follow Jeff on Twitter:
            > CMMIAppraiser
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > On Apr 28, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Orhan KALAYCI wrote:
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > > Mike,
            > >>> >
            > >>> >
            > >>> > I think you are
            > right that the purpose of SCAMPI A is still to help organizations improve.
            > However, I am not sure if it really makes sense. Because the use of SCAMPI A
            > is totally di
            > >>
            > >>
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.