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

Re: Any company applying Agile is successfully appraised as CMMI Level 5?

Expand Messages
  • Long Truong
    Hello Jorge, Thanks for taking time to reply. Agreed with you that instead of measuring per sprint, an Agile project needs to measure by task. However, it is
    Message 1 of 7 , May 28 8:59 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello Jorge,

      Thanks for taking time to reply. Agreed with you that instead of measuring per sprint, an Agile project needs to measure by task. However, it is only for QPM, I think. How about for other process areas like OPP (for example)? In order to satisfy OPP's requirements, a company must establish and use Process Performance Baselines (PPB) and Process Performance Model (PPM). In Agile world, because there is no standardized way to size user story in story points, and thus, we can't build PPB. So, do you have any insight on how these companies satisfied OPP's requirements?

      Best Regards,

      Long

      --- In cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com, "Jorge" <jorge.boria@...> wrote:
      >
      > Synapsis, A company in Niteroi RJ, Brazil, was appraised at ML5 and were using their own variation of Agile,with sprints of three to four weeks and small teams with leaders that were not managers in the hierarchical sense. Their main line of work was adding functionality to their legacy products.
      >
      > Similarly, Intellego in Mexico City has achieved ML5. Again, a home breed variation of Agile and some particularly interesting apps for mobile phones.
      >
      > The trick is, however, indifferent to agile versus traditional teams. It lies in how you parse your tasks and how you capture and analyse your data. Same old, same old. As long as you measure per sprint your data is not going to help you. Measure by task, as in the sprint backlog, and you can be successful.
      >
      > Happy to help,
      >
      > Jorge
      >
      > --- In cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com, "Long Truong" <binhlong@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Hello Everyone,
      > >
      > > In CMMI-DEV v1.3, I see that there are some elaborations / guidelines for Agile. Is there any company who are using Agile successfully appraised as CMMI L5? If yes, could you please list out some company names for my reference?
      > >
      > > Best Regards,
      > >
      > > Long
      > >
      >
    • pactotoole
      Long, Remember that the relationship between QPM and OPP is the same as the relationship between IPM and OPD. That is, at ML3, OPD provides the process
      Message 2 of 7 , May 30 8:21 PM
      • 0 Attachment
         
        Long,
         
        Remember that the relationship between QPM and OPP is the same as the relationship between IPM and OPD.  That is, at ML3, OPD provides the process infrastructure that is exploited by the projects in IPM – the project team takes the standard processes off the OPD shelf and applies the OPD-provided tailoring guidelines to establish the project’s defined processes.
         
        Analogously, at ML4, OPP provides the quantitative management infrastructure that is exploited by the projects in QPM – the project team takes the process performance baselines and process performance models off the OPP shelf and uses them to compose the defined processes and then to quantitatively manage the processes.
         
        In this regard, very little is “only for QPM;” most of what is used to quantitatively manage the project in QPM is based on the stuff established and maintained in OPP.
         
        I’m not trying to contribute to your primary question – what can be quantitatively managed in Agile projects.  Rather, I’m just trying to alter your thinking that something that benefits QPM has no effect on OPP.  Note that in QPM, 6 of the 7 specific practices (all but SP2.1) suggest the use of process performance models to assist in the execution of the practice.  PPBs and PPMs are merely “stuff” in OPP; that “stuff” is exploited in QPM when it is applied to the benefit of a given project.  In other words, if OPP’s PPBs and PPMs are not going to be used in QPM, then why did you establish them in the first place???  (Or, said differently, QPM should not “pass” an appraisal if PPBs and PPMs are not being used – without PPBs and PPMs QPM is spelled “IPM”).
         
        Now back to your regularly scheduled program...
         
        Pat
         
         
         
         
         
        Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 10:59 PM
        Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: Any company applying Agile is successfully appraised as CMMI Level 5?
         
         



        Hello Jorge,

        Thanks for taking time to reply. Agreed with you that instead of measuring per sprint, an Agile project needs to measure by task. However, it is only for QPM, I think. How about for other process areas like OPP (for example)? In order to satisfy OPP's requirements, a company must establish and use Process Performance Baselines (PPB) and Process Performance Model (PPM). In Agile world, because there is no standardized way to size user story in story points, and thus, we can't build PPB. So, do you have any insight on how these companies satisfied OPP's requirements?

        Best Regards,

        Long

        --- In mailto:cmmi_process_improvement%40yahoogroups.com, "Jorge" <jorge.boria@...> wrote:

        >
        > Synapsis, A company in
        Niteroi RJ, Brazil, was appraised at ML5 and were using their own variation of Agile,with sprints of three to four weeks and small teams with leaders that were not managers in the hierarchical sense. Their main line of work was adding functionality to their legacy products.
        >
        > Similarly, Intellego
        in Mexico City has achieved ML5. Again, a home breed variation of Agile and some particularly interesting apps for mobile phones.
        >
        > The trick is,
        however, indifferent to agile versus traditional teams. It lies in how you parse your tasks and how you capture and analyse your data. Same old, same old. As long as you measure per sprint your data is not going to help you. Measure by task, as in the sprint backlog, and you can be successful.
        >
        >
        Happy to help,
        >
        > Jorge
        >
        > --- In
        href="mailto:cmmi_process_improvement%40yahoogroups.com">mailto:cmmi_process_improvement%40yahoogroups.com, "Long Truong" <binhlong@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Hello
        Everyone,
        > >
        > > In CMMI-DEV v1.3, I see that there are some
        elaborations / guidelines for Agile. Is there any company who are using Agile successfully appraised as CMMI L5? If yes, could you please list out some company names for my reference?
        > >
        > > Best Regards,
        > >
        > > Long
        > >
        >

      • Long Truong
        Hello Pat, Thank you very much for the answer. To the point most of what is used to quantitatively manage the project in QPM is based on the stuff
        Message 3 of 7 , Jun 10, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Hello Pat,
           
          Thank you very much for the answer.  To the point "most of what is used to quantitatively manage the project in QPM is based on the stuff established and maintained in OPP", from my point of view, normally, a project manager only uses things from OPP at the beginning of his/her project.  Later, the project manager tends to use historical data to build models specific to his/her project and start using these models along the way.  Calibration to these models will happen when more data comes.  So, project managers seem to use their models to quantitatively manage their projects not solely rely on PPMs from OPP.  In this situation, does QPM still pass an appraisal?
           
          One more thing (maybe away from this topic), in OPM, I understand that I need to have some PPMs to predict benefits of an innovation to decide go or no-go.  However, it is really a tough thing to do as because innovation is always new that I can't base on historical data to do a prediction.  For example, in the past, we received many complaints about English communication of our associates.  To resolve this issue, we thought of an online English club where people could help others to improve their English.  That was an innovation actually but we were stuck at predicting benefits of this tool to decide whether we should build that tool or not because our historical data only includes something like Productivity (SLOC / hour), Quality (defect / KSLOC), On-time Delivery (%), etc.  How would I deal with this issue?
           
          Thanks and Best Regards,
           
          Long
          2013/5/31 <PACT.otoole@...>
          Long,
           
          Remember that the relationship between QPM and OPP is the same as the relationship between IPM and OPD.  That is, at ML3, OPD provides the process infrastructure that is exploited by the projects in IPM – the project team takes the standard processes off the OPD shelf and applies the OPD-provided tailoring guidelines to establish the project’s defined processes.
           
          Analogously, at ML4, OPP provides the quantitative management infrastructure that is exploited by the projects in QPM – the project team takes the process performance baselines and process performance models off the OPP shelf and uses them to compose the defined processes and then to quantitatively manage the processes.
           
          In this regard, very little is “only for QPM;” most of what is used to quantitatively manage the project in QPM is based on the stuff established and maintained in OPP.
           
          I’m not trying to contribute to your primary question – what can be quantitatively managed in Agile projects.  Rather, I’m just trying to alter your thinking that something that benefits QPM has no effect on OPP.  Note that in QPM, 6 of the 7 specific practices (all but SP2.1) suggest the use of process performance models to assist in the execution of the practice.  PPBs and PPMs are merely “stuff” in OPP; that “stuff” is exploited in QPM when it is applied to the benefit of a given project.  In other words, if OPP’s PPBs and PPMs are not going to be used in QPM, then why did you establish them in the first place???  (Or, said differently, QPM should not “pass” an appraisal if PPBs and PPMs are not being used – without PPBs and PPMs QPM is spelled “IPM”).
           
          Now back to your regularly scheduled program...
           
          Pat
            
          Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 10:59 PM
          Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: Any company applying Agile is successfully appraised as CMMI Level 5?

          Hello Jorge,

          Thanks for taking time to reply. Agreed with you that instead of measuring per sprint, an Agile project needs to measure by task. However, it is only for QPM, I think. How about for other process areas like OPP (for example)? In order to satisfy OPP's requirements, a company must establish and use Process Performance Baselines (PPB) and Process Performance Model (PPM). In Agile world, because there is no standardized way to size user story in story points, and thus, we can't build PPB. So, do you have any insight on how these companies satisfied OPP's requirements?

          Best Regards,

          Long

          --- In mailto:cmmi_process_improvement%40yahoogroups.com, "Jorge" <jorge.boria@...> wrote:
          >
          > Synapsis, A company in Niteroi RJ, Brazil, was appraised at ML5 and were using their own variation of Agile,with sprints of three to four weeks and small teams with leaders that were not managers in the hierarchical sense. Their main line of work was adding functionality to their legacy products.
          >
          > Similarly, Intellego in Mexico City has achieved ML5. Again, a home breed variation of Agile and some particularly interesting apps for mobile phones.
          >
          > The trick is, however, indifferent to agile versus traditional teams. It lies in how you parse your tasks and how you capture and analyse your data. Same old, same old. As long as you measure per sprint your data is not going to help you. Measure by task, as in the sprint backlog, and you can be successful.
          >
          > Happy to help,
          >
          > Jorge
          >
          > --- In mailto:cmmi_process_improvement%40yahoogroups.com, "Long Truong" <binhlong@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Hello Everyone,
          > >
          > > In CMMI-DEV v1.3, I see that there are some elaborations / guidelines for Agile. Is there any company who are using Agile successfully appraised as CMMI L5? If yes, could you please list out some company names for my reference?
          > >
          > > Best Regards,
          > >
          > > Long
          > >
          >

          Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (4)
          Recent Activity:
          .


        • pactotoole
          Long, Apparently we’ve seen different things when it comes to the use of PPMs. I’m not saying that one perspective is better than another, but it is good
          Message 4 of 7 , Jun 10, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
             
            Long,
             
            Apparently we’ve seen different things when it comes to the use of PPMs.  I’m not saying that one perspective is better than another, but it is good to understand the context and perspective of the other person when trying to share ideas.
             
            In my experience, projects typically use the well-established PPMs that are sitting on the “OPP shelf” and only create new models when facing a unique situation not covered by the existing set of models.  Sure, they will populate the existing models with the own project data, but the off-the-shelf model itself (or a tailored variant thereof) typically provides the basic, and hopefully “proven,” approach.
             
            When a new model IS developed by a project, it is typically submitted to the EPG (or equivalent) for “generalization” and inclusion in the set of models available for use by future projects.  Individual project’s contributions of such models to be used by future projects is certainly a valuable contribution to OPP, and therefore would provide appropriate evidence in an appraisal.  On the other hand, if the projects do NOT provide such models to the organization for use by others, it’s harder to argue that they are contributing to ORGANIZATION Process Performance.
             
            From a QPM perspective, it makes little difference whether PPMs are sourced from the organizational collection of models or from the project’s private stash.  QPM is much more concerned about insightful project execution than the source of the tools and techniques that leads to such insight.
             
            - - - - -
             
            OPM SP2.2, subpractice 1 indicates that PPMs may be useful in analyzing the effect of process changes on process capability and performance.  As with any other subpractice in the model, I would caution you (and/or your lead appraiser) against viewing this as a model requirement (it’s not a goal) or even an expectation (it’s not a practice).  Rather, I would encourage you to view that subpractice as any other subpractice – as a “suggestion” that may be useful in some situations and less so in others.  That is, not EVERY incremental or innovative improvement idea will benefit from the use of PPMs – but some may.  Use such PPMs where they provide insight, and use alternative means of predicting likely outcomes of a candidate change where they don’t. 
             
            Note, too, that the associated example box indicates “discussions with stakeholders” may be sufficient.  In my view, the REAL trick is to avoid constant gravitation to the lowest common denominator – i.e., “discussions with stakeholders” – when deeper insight is warranted.  Remember that the objectives is NOT to determine “what will pass the appraisal;” but to determine “how do we achieve superior performance.”  Focus on the right objective and the appraisal will take care of itself!
             
            Pat
             
             
            Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 7:19 AM
            Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: Any company applying Agile is successfully appraised as CMMI Level 5?
             
             

            Hello Pat,
             
            Thank you very much for the answer.  To the point "most of what is used to quantitatively manage the project in QPM is based on the stuff established and maintained in OPP", from my point of view, normally, a project manager only uses things from OPP at the beginning of his/her project.  Later, the project manager tends to use historical data to build models specific to his/her project and start using these models along the way.  Calibration to these models will happen when more data comes.  So, project managers seem to use their models to quantitatively manage their projects not solely rely on PPMs from OPP.  In this situation, does QPM still pass an appraisal?
             
            One more thing (maybe away from this topic), in OPM, I understand that I need to have some PPMs to predict benefits of an innovation to decide go or no-go.  However, it is really a tough thing to do as because innovation is always new that I can't base on historical data to do a prediction.  For example, in the past, we received many complaints about English communication of our associates.  To resolve this issue, we thought of an online English club where people could help others to improve their English.  That was an innovation actually but we were stuck at predicting benefits of this tool to decide whether we should build that tool or not because our historical data only includes something like Productivity (SLOC / hour), Quality (defect / KSLOC), On-time Delivery (%), etc.  How would I deal with this issue?
             
            Thanks and Best Regards,
             
            Long
            2013/5/31 <PACT.otoole@...>
            Long,
             
            Remember that the relationship between QPM and OPP is the same as the relationship between IPM and OPD.  That is, at ML3, OPD provides the process infrastructure that is exploited by the projects in IPM – the project team takes the standard processes off the OPD shelf and applies the OPD-provided tailoring guidelines to establish the project’s defined processes.
             
            Analogously, at ML4, OPP provides the quantitative management infrastructure that is exploited by the projects in QPM – the project team takes the process performance baselines and process performance models off the OPP shelf and uses them to compose the defined processes and then to quantitatively manage the processes.
             
            In this regard, very little is “only for QPM;” most of what is used to quantitatively manage the project in QPM is based on the stuff established and maintained in OPP.
             
            I’m not trying to contribute to your primary question – what can be quantitatively managed in Agile projects.  Rather, I’m just trying to alter your thinking that something that benefits QPM has no effect on OPP.  Note that in QPM, 6 of the 7 specific practices (all but SP2.1) suggest the use of process performance models to assist in the execution of the practice.  PPBs and PPMs are merely “stuff” in OPP; that “stuff” is exploited in QPM when it is applied to the benefit of a given project.  In other words, if OPP’s PPBs and PPMs are not going to be used in QPM, then why did you establish them in the first place???  (Or, said differently, QPM should not “pass” an appraisal if PPBs and PPMs are not being used – without PPBs and PPMs QPM is spelled “IPM”).
             
            Now back to your regularly scheduled program...
             
            Pat
            Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 10:59 PM
            Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: Any company applying Agile is successfully appraised as CMMI Level 5?

            Hello Jorge,

            Thanks for taking time to reply. Agreed with you that instead of measuring per sprint, an Agile project needs to measure by task. However, it is only for QPM, I think. How about for other process areas like OPP (for example)? In order to satisfy OPP's requirements, a company must establish and use Process Performance Baselines (PPB) and Process Performance Model (PPM). In Agile world, because there is no standardized way to size user story in story points, and thus, we can't build PPB. So, do you have any insight on how these companies satisfied OPP's requirements?

            Best Regards,

            Long

            --- In mailto:cmmi_process_improvement%40yahoogroups.com, "Jorge" <jorge.boria@...> wrote:
            >
            > Synapsis, A company in Niteroi RJ, Brazil, was appraised at ML5 and were using their own variation of Agile,with sprints of three to four weeks and small teams with leaders that were not managers in the hierarchical sense. Their main line of work was adding functionality to their legacy products.
            >
            > Similarly, Intellego in Mexico City has achieved ML5. Again, a home breed variation of Agile and some particularly interesting apps for mobile phones.
            >
            > The trick is, however, indifferent to agile versus traditional teams. It lies in how you parse your tasks and how you capture and analyse your data. Same old, same old. As long as you measure per sprint your data is not going to help you. Measure by task, as in the sprint backlog, and you can be successful.
            >
            > Happy to help,
            >
            > Jorge
            >
            > --- In mailto:cmmi_process_improvement%40yahoogroups.com, "Long Truong" <binhlong@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Hello Everyone,
            > >
            > > In CMMI-DEV v1.3, I see that there are some elaborations / guidelines for Agile. Is there any company who are using Agile successfully appraised as CMMI L5? If yes, could you please list out some company names for my reference?
            > >
            > > Best Regards,
            > >
            > > Long
            > >
            >

            Reply via web postReply to sender Reply to group Start a New TopicMessages in this topic (4)
            Recent Activity:
            .


          • Long Truong
            Hello Pat, Thank you for the valuable answers. It helps me much. Best Regards, Long 2013/6/10 ... Hello Pat,   Thank you for the
            Message 5 of 7 , Jun 10, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Hello Pat,
               
              Thank you for the valuable answers.  It helps me much.
               
              Best Regards,
               
              Long

              2013/6/10 <PACT.otoole@...>
              Long,
               
              Apparently we’ve seen different things when it comes to the use of PPMs.  I’m not saying that one perspective is better than another, but it is good to understand the context and perspective of the other person when trying to share ideas.
               
              In my experience, projects typically use the well-established PPMs that are sitting on the “OPP shelf” and only create new models when facing a unique situation not covered by the existing set of models.  Sure, they will populate the existing models with the own project data, but the off-the-shelf model itself (or a tailored variant thereof) typically provides the basic, and hopefully “proven,” approach.
               
              When a new model IS developed by a project, it is typically submitted to the EPG (or equivalent) for “generalization” and inclusion in the set of models available for use by future projects.  Individual project’s contributions of such models to be used by future projects is certainly a valuable contribution to OPP, and therefore would provide appropriate evidence in an appraisal.  On the other hand, if the projects do NOT provide such models to the organization for use by others, it’s harder to argue that they are contributing to ORGANIZATION Process Performance.
               
              From a QPM perspective, it makes little difference whether PPMs are sourced from the organizational collection of models or from the project’s private stash.  QPM is much more concerned about insightful project execution than the source of the tools and techniques that leads to such insight.
               
              - - - - -
               
              OPM SP2.2, subpractice 1 indicates that PPMs may be useful in analyzing the effect of process changes on process capability and performance.  As with any other subpractice in the model, I would caution you (and/or your lead appraiser) against viewing this as a model requirement (it’s not a goal) or even an expectation (it’s not a practice).  Rather, I would encourage you to view that subpractice as any other subpractice – as a “suggestion” that may be useful in some situations and less so in others.  That is, not EVERY incremental or innovative improvement idea will benefit from the use of PPMs – but some may.  Use such PPMs where they provide insight, and use alternative means of predicting likely outcomes of a candidate change where they don’t. 
               
              Note, too, that the associated example box indicates “discussions with stakeholders” may be sufficient.  In my view, the REAL trick is to avoid constant gravitation to the lowest common denominator – i.e., “discussions with stakeholders” – when deeper insight is warranted.  Remember that the objectives is NOT to determine “what will pass the appraisal;” but to determine “how do we achieve superior performance.”  Focus on the right objective and the appraisal will take care of itself!
               
              Pat
               
               
              Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 7:19 AM
              Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: Any company applying Agile is successfully appraised as CMMI Level 5?
               
               
              Hello Pat,
              Thank you very much for the answer.  To the point "most of what is used to quantitatively manage the project in QPM is based on the stuff established and maintained in OPP", from my point of view, normally, a project manager only uses things from OPP at the beginning of his/her project.  Later, the project manager tends to use historical data to build models specific to his/her project and start using these models along the way.  Calibration to these models will happen when more data comes.  So, project managers seem to use their models to quantitatively manage their projects not solely rely on PPMs from OPP.  In this situation, does QPM still pass an appraisal?
               
              One more thing (maybe away from this topic), in OPM, I understand that I need to have some PPMs to predict benefits of an innovation to decide go or no-go.  However, it is really a tough thing to do as because innovation is always new that I can't base on historical data to do a prediction.  For example, in the past, we received many complaints about English communication of our associates.  To resolve this issue, we thought of an online English club where people could help others to improve their English.  That was an innovation actually but we were stuck at predicting benefits of this tool to decide whether we should build that tool or not because our historical data only includes something like Productivity (SLOC / hour), Quality (defect / KSLOC), On-time Delivery (%), etc.  How would I deal with this issue?
               
              Thanks and Best Regards,
               
              Long
              2013/5/31 <PACT.otoole@...>
              Long,
               
              Remember that the relationship between QPM and OPP is the same as the relationship between IPM and OPD.  That is, at ML3, OPD provides the process infrastructure that is exploited by the projects in IPM – the project team takes the standard processes off the OPD shelf and applies the OPD-provided tailoring guidelines to establish the project’s defined processes.
               
              Analogously, at ML4, OPP provides the quantitative management infrastructure that is exploited by the projects in QPM – the project team takes the process performance baselines and process performance models off the OPP shelf and uses them to compose the defined processes and then to quantitatively manage the processes.
               
              In this regard, very little is “only for QPM;” most of what is used to quantitatively manage the project in QPM is based on the stuff established and maintained in OPP.
               
              I’m not trying to contribute to your primary question – what can be quantitatively managed in Agile projects.  Rather, I’m just trying to alter your thinking that something that benefits QPM has no effect on OPP.  Note that in QPM, 6 of the 7 specific practices (all but SP2.1) suggest the use of process performance models to assist in the execution of the practice.  PPBs and PPMs are merely “stuff” in OPP; that “stuff” is exploited in QPM when it is applied to the benefit of a given project.  In other words, if OPP’s PPBs and PPMs are not going to be used in QPM, then why did you establish them in the first place???  (Or, said differently, QPM should not “pass” an appraisal if PPBs and PPMs are not being used – without PPBs and PPMs QPM is spelled “IPM”).
               
              Now back to your regularly scheduled program...
               
              Pat
              Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 10:59 PM
              Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Re: Any company applying Agile is successfully appraised as CMMI Level 5?

              Hello Jorge,

              Thanks for taking time to reply. Agreed with you that instead of measuring per sprint, an Agile project needs to measure by task. However, it is only for QPM, I think. How about for other process areas like OPP (for example)? In order to satisfy OPP's requirements, a company must establish and use Process Performance Baselines (PPB) and Process Performance Model (PPM). In Agile world, because there is no standardized way to size user story in story points, and thus, we can't build PPB. So, do you have any insight on how these companies satisfied OPP's requirements?

              Best Regards,

              Long

              --- In mailto:cmmi_process_improvement%40yahoogroups.com, "Jorge" <jorge.boria@...> wrote:
              >
              > Synapsis, A company in Niteroi RJ, Brazil, was appraised at ML5 and were using their own variation of Agile,with sprints of three to four weeks and small teams with leaders that were not managers in the hierarchical sense. Their main line of work was adding functionality to their legacy products.
              >
              > Similarly, Intellego in Mexico City has achieved ML5. Again, a home breed variation of Agile and some particularly interesting apps for mobile phones.
              >
              > The trick is, however, indifferent to agile versus traditional teams. It lies in how you parse your tasks and how you capture and analyse your data. Same old, same old. As long as you measure per sprint your data is not going to help you. Measure by task, as in the sprint backlog, and you can be successful.
              >
              > Happy to help,
              >
              > Jorge
              >
              > --- In mailto:cmmi_process_improvement%40yahoogroups.com, "Long Truong" <binhlong@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Hello Everyone,
              > >
              > > In CMMI-DEV v1.3, I see that there are some elaborations / guidelines for Agile. Is there any company who are using Agile successfully appraised as CMMI L5? If yes, could you please list out some company names for my reference?
              > >
              > > Best Regards,
              > >
              > > Long
              > >
              >

              Reply via web postReply to sender Reply to group Start a New TopicMessages in this topic (4)
              Recent Activity:
              .



            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.