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

Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] PPQA Process

Expand Messages
  • Neil Potter
    Hi Andre, Thank you for your email. I know that the model says not to wait! I was discussing intent versus legal interpretation. We cant always assume a)
    Message 1 of 24 , Nov 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Andre, Thank you for your email.

      I know that the model says not to wait!

      I was discussing intent versus legal interpretation. We cant always assume
      a) people do X, just because others do, and b) people do L3 process areas at
      L1 "because it's obvious"

      For history buffs, back in the cmm is said:

      The SQA group audits designated software work products to
      verify compliance.
      1. The deliverable software products are evaluated before they are
      delivered to the customer.
      2. The software work products are evaluated against the designated
      software standards, procedures, and contractual requirements.

      Neil



      > Hello Neil,
      >
      > I don't think VER is not "done" in a level 1 or 2 organization - at least I
      > have never come across any organization that did not perform any level of
      > testing.
      > The fact that VER comes in level 3 does not mean the model suggests you wait
      > with testing until then. Try to reason the same way for TS - that would
      > suggest you don't do any coding until level 3 - surely the most certain way
      > into trouble for a software organization.
      >
      > The staging of PA's tells you the order in which to IMPROVE the process
      > areas, not the order in which to PERFORM them.
      >
      > On your second point. In my interpretation a PRODUCT is a special case of a
      > WORK PRODUCT. So when you evaluate work products you will definitely also
      > evaluate the final product.
      >
      > Regards, Andre.
      >
      >
      > On 01-11-2005 02:59, "Neil Potter" <neil@...> wrote:
      >
      >> Hi Suzanne
      >>
      >> I know legally one could interpret PPQA this way, but that makes more sense
      >> to me when assuming VER is also done. In a staged implementation I think it
      >> is a too limited interpretation. The VER PA is not usually done when moving
      >> from L1 to 2.
      >>
      >> Interesting that one of the sub practices says:
      >>
      >> 4. Evaluate work products before they are delivered to the customer.
      >>
      >> -- and there is a chance that no work product is delivered to the customer,
      >> only the final product, and that one wouldn't get evaluated. May be that is
      >> what some of my PC app suppliers do!
      >>
      >> Illegally, Neil
      >>
      >>> yes. the verification process area where you are required to check for
      >>> conformance to requirements, and the REQM PA where you are supposed to keep
      >>> design, requirements, and other work products consistent (all to the same
      >>> requirements).
      >>>
      >>> The Model partitions things carefully to make sure they are all done. Just
      >>> because ensuring compliance to requirements (such as testing) isn't in QA
      >>> doesn't mean it isn't in the model. It does mean that it is separated from
      >>> requirements verification to make sure conformance to standards is checked.
      >>>
      >>> ----- Original Message -----
      >>> From: "Neil Potter" <neil@...>
      >>> To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
      >>> Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] PPQA Process
      >>> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 17:26:28 -0600
      >>>
      >>>>
      >>>> Hi Suzanne
      >>>>
      >>>> So to check my understanding:
      >>>>
      >>>> PPQA does not imply any product testing is done, and although cmmi defines
      >>>> a
      >>>> 'product' as an example of a 'work product', PPQA does not include testing
      >>>> of that product, because work products are only checked for conformance to
      >>>> process descriptions, standards, and procedures. And because this list does
      >>>> not say 'product or customer reqs' then the PPQA PA does not *need* to
      >>>> check
      >>>> that the final product works, only that non-final-product work products are
      >>>> OK. So the intent of PPQA is to have great designs, test plans and trace
      >>>> matrices, and then whatever code comes out of the developer is not
      >>>> necessarily tested.
      >>>>
      >>>> ...now I know groups might go beyond this, but here I want to pin down the
      >>>> scope of PPQA, not 'some group'
      >>>>
      >>>> I missed something?
      >>>>
      >>>> Neil
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>> to get credit in PPQA, you would have to be looking for
      >>>>> conformance to process
      >>>>> descriptions, standards, and procedures. How does verification against
      >>>>> requireemnts fit that requirement?
      >>>>>
      >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
      >>>>> From: "Neil Potter" <neil@...>
      >>>>> To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
      >>>>> Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] PPQA Process
      >>>>> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 09:23:42 -0600
      >>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> Hi Suzanne
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> At level 2 they would get credit for PPQA, then at Level 3 credit for
      >>>>>> PPQA,
      >>>>>> VER and may be VAL.
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>> If they're checking conformance to documented requirements, they get
      >>>>>>> credit
      >>>>>>> in VER.
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> Neil
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> The Process Group
      >>>>>> Email: neil@...
      >>>>>> Tel:972-418-9541
      >>>>>> Fax:972-618-6283
      >>>>>> http://www.processgroup.com
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>
      >>>> Please feel free to email with questions.
      >>>>
      >>>> Thanks and regards, Neil Potter
      >>>>
      >>>> The Process Group
      >>>> Email: neil@...
      >>>> Tel:972-418-9541
      >>>> Fax:972-618-6283
      >>>> http://www.processgroup.com
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>
      >>
      >> Please feel free to email with questions.
      >>
      >> Thanks and regards, Neil Potter
      >>
      >> The Process Group
      >> Email: neil@...
      >> Tel:972-418-9541
      >> Fax:972-618-6283
      >> http://www.processgroup.com
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> Yahoo! Groups Links
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>

      Please feel free to email with questions.

      Thanks and regards, Neil Potter

      The Process Group
      Email: neil@...
      Tel:972-418-9541
      Fax:972-618-6283
      http://www.processgroup.com
    • Mike Bandor
      ... [ ... remaining text deleted ...] I have to agree with you. A lot of organizations get confused when trying to compare the workcenter performing the
      Message 2 of 24 , Nov 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Suzanne Zampella wrote:

        >yes. the verification process area where you are required to check for conformance to requirements, and the REQM PA where you are supposed to keep design, requirements, and other work products consistent (all to the same requirements).
        >
        >The Model partitions things carefully to make sure they are all done. Just because ensuring compliance to requirements (such as testing) isn't in QA doesn't mean it isn't in the model. It does mean that it is separated from requirements verification to make sure conformance to standards is checked.
        >
        >
        >
        >

        [ ... remaining text deleted ...]

        I have to agree with you. A lot of organizations get confused when
        trying to compare the workcenter performing the process and the process
        area itself. It may or may not be a clean demarcation. I've seen
        organizations that have a "QA" workcenter that performed PPQA, VER, and
        VAL (yes, they did QA and Testing as two separate branches within the
        workcenter). I've also seen a QA/CM hybrid. My previous organization
        had an instance were RD and REQM were split across 3 different
        workcenters, including the customer reps! I have also see a one-for-one
        alignment of organizations with the process areas. Its entirely up to
        the organization in how they which to implement/divide the process areas
        within their organization.

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