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

Re: Organizational Policy

Expand Messages
  • Vijay Ghate
    Hi, I would prefer what Prasad suggested. If you carefully look at what Gerold suggested, you can never prove full compliance to this policy. ALL POTENTIAL
    Message 1 of 9 , May 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,

      I would prefer what Prasad suggested.

      If you carefully look at what Gerold suggested, you can never prove full
      compliance to this policy.

      ALL POTENTIAL PROBLEMS is dangerous statement. How can you know all the potential problems? It is much better to say "all identified" etc.

      My background is more in implementing ISO 9001:2000. I am at present working
      on mapping between CMMI and ISO 9001:2000.

      ---------------------------------------
      Regards
      Vijay Ghate


      GAV Prasad \(SQA\) writes:

      > Hi Rich,
      >
      > Adding to the PPQA:
      >
      > " All identified Processes and work products shall be objectively evaluated with respect to established Procedures/Standards and inconsistancies are communicated to all relavent stakeholders and resolved by assained QA group/ person"
      >
      > Regards,
      > Prasad
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: gkeefer@...
      > To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 10:51 AM
      > Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] Organizational Policy
      >
      >
      > hi rich,
      >
      > PPQA:
      >
      > "Zero Failure: No surprise at the customer. All potential
      > problems have to be known by the customer at release time."
      >
      > kind regards,
      >
      > gerold
      >
      > Rich Cyran <rich_cyran@...> schrieb am 29.04.2003, 21:44:20:
      > > Does anyone have an example of an organizational
      > > policy statement for CMMI for any of the Level 2
      > > process areas.
      > >
      > > Thanks
      > >
      > > R.Cyran
      > >
      > > __________________________________
      > > Do you Yahoo!?
      > > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
      > > http://search.yahoo.com
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > > cmmi_process_improvement-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      >
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > cmmi_process_improvement-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
      >
    • Gerold Keefer
      ... granted. all known problems would be my correction. given that correction i would prefer the policy is stated, because of its simplicity. yes,
      Message 2 of 9 , May 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Vijay Ghate wrote:

        > ALL POTENTIAL PROBLEMS is dangerous statement.
        > How can you know all the potential problems? It
        > is much better to say "all identified" etc.

        granted. "all known problems" would be my correction.
        given that correction i would prefer the policy
        is stated, because of its simplicity.
        yes, "stakeholders" and "objectively evaluated"
        sounds much more impressive, but in order to have
        an impact, the message should be simple to
        understand and communicate.

        regards,

        gerold
      • Vijay Ghate
        Gerold, I agree.The policy should be simple, easy to understand and maybe to remember! Vijay
        Message 3 of 9 , May 2, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Gerold,

          I agree.The policy should be simple, easy to understand and maybe to
          remember!

          Vijay
          ----------------------

          Gerold Keefer writes:

          > Vijay Ghate wrote:
          >
          >> ALL POTENTIAL PROBLEMS is dangerous statement.
          >> How can you know all the potential problems? It
          >> is much better to say "all identified" etc.
          >
          > granted. "all known problems" would be my correction.
          > given that correction i would prefer the policy
          > is stated, because of its simplicity.
          > yes, "stakeholders" and "objectively evaluated"
          > sounds much more impressive, but in order to have
          > an impact, the message should be simple to
          > understand and communicate.
          >
          > regards,
          >
          > gerold
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
          > Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
          > http://us.click.yahoo.com/O10svD/Me7FAA/uetFAA/nhFolB/TM
          > ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
          >
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > cmmi_process_improvement-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
        • Buglione Luigi
          Hello Rick, CMMI defines in its glossary the organizational policy as A guiding principle typically established by senior management that is adopted by an
          Message 4 of 9 , Aug 24, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello Rick,
             
            CMMI defines in its glossary the organizational policy as "A guiding principle typically established by senior management that is adopted by an organization to influence and determine decisions". As you know, for each PA there is an elaboration of the GP2.1, indicating the "what" should contain such policy.
            The suggestion is to apply the "5W's+H rule" to each OP, explictly indicating the "who, what, why, where, when, and how" within a certain elaboration.
             
            Some examples found on the net for taking ideas are in the SEP web site (https://web1.ssg.gunter.af.mil/sep/SEP/menus/main.asp?.8391044569124197): you can browse and access documents (including policies) from the menu on the left, going to the "Document Breakout" item and then choosing a sub-item.
             
            Other suggestions and comments about this issue are from Pat O'Toole, in particular about establishing organizational policies and not CMM policies (http://www.awprofessional.com/articles/article.asp?p=27124) but don't using them as behavioural guidelines (http://www.awprofessional.com/articles/article.asp?p=27019).
             
            Hoping this info could be helpful,
             
            Best regards,
            Luigi Buglione
             
            -----Original Message-----
            From: rw_ricky_wood [mailto:ricky.wood@...]
            Sent: martedì 17 agosto 2004 15.55
            To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Organizational Policy

            I am developing a policy for a CMMI level 2 process area. I would
            like to have some guidance on what to put exactly in a policy.
            CMMI demands that an organizational policy is established for each
            process area. In the elaboration paragraph, it is stated: "This
            policy establishes organizational expectations for....
            Does that mean that in the policy at a minimum we need to specify
            who (what function or department) in the technology organization is
            responsible for specific process steps (a at detail similar to a
            generic or specific practice?). Would this be a good thing to do?

            References to good example of such policies are always welcome.

            Rick
          • Gerhard.Tekes (Telematic)
            Hi Luigi, As we don`t have any policie for configuration management yet in the company, I was very interested to see some examples. But the link
            Message 5 of 9 , Aug 31, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Luigi,
              As we don`t have any policie for configuration management yet in the company, I was very interested to see some examples. But the link (web1.ssg.....) is broken. Do you have any other link?
               
              TYVM and regards from Brazil
               
              -------
              Gerhard J. Tekes
              gerhard.tekes@...
              www.telematic.com.br
              Tel: + 55 (71) 369.8655
              Fax: + 55 (71) 379.0324
              Cel: + 55 (71) 9148.6691
               
              Agility is not an inescapable law of purity but a pragmatic principle of effectiveness. -- Marc Hamann
               
               
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 5:02 AM
              Subject: RE: [CMMi Process Improvement] Organizational Policy

              Hello Rick,
               
              CMMI defines in its glossary the organizational policy as "A guiding principle typically established by senior management that is adopted by an organization to influence and determine decisions". As you know, for each PA there is an elaboration of the GP2.1, indicating the "what" should contain such policy.
              The suggestion is to apply the "5W's+H rule" to each OP, explictly indicating the "who, what, why, where, when, and how" within a certain elaboration.
               
              Some examples found on the net for taking ideas are in the SEP web site (https://web1.ssg.gunter.af.mil/sep/SEP/menus/main.asp?.8391044569124197): you can browse and access documents (including policies) from the menu on the left, going to the "Document Breakout" item and then choosing a sub-item.
               
              Other suggestions and comments about this issue are from Pat O'Toole, in particular about establishing organizational policies and not CMM policies (http://www.awprofessional.com/articles/article.asp?p=27124) but don't using them as behavioural guidelines (http://www.awprofessional.com/articles/article.asp?p=27019).
               
              Hoping this info could be helpful,
               
              Best regards,
              Luigi Buglione
               
              -----Original Message-----
              From: rw_ricky_wood [mailto:ricky.wood@...]
              Sent: martedì 17 agosto 2004 15.55
              To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Organizational Policy

              I am developing a policy for a CMMI level 2 process area. I would
              like to have some guidance on what to put exactly in a policy.
              CMMI demands that an organizational policy is established for each
              process area. In the elaboration paragraph, it is stated: "This
              policy establishes organizational expectations for....
              Does that mean that in the policy at a minimum we need to specify
              who (what function or department) in the technology organization is
              responsible for specific process steps (a at detail similar to a
              generic or specific practice?). Would this be a good thing to do?

              References to good example of such policies are always welcome.

              Rick

            • Buglione Luigi
              Hi Gerhard, some information could be taken from here ( http://cs.wwc.edu/~aabyan/435/Forms/SCMP.html), where -
              Message 6 of 9 , Sep 1 1:30 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Gerhard,
                 
                some information could be taken from here (http://cs.wwc.edu/~aabyan/435/Forms/SCMP.html), where - on the basis of the IEEE Std 828-1998 (http://www.din.uem.br/~jucimar/Engenharia%20de%20Software/SCM/IEEE%20Std%20828-1998(Revision%20of%20IEEE%20Std%20828-1990)%20-%20Standard%20for%20Software%20Configuration%20Management%20Plans.pdf) - the TOC for a SwConfiguration Management Plan (SCMP) is proposed. Here (http://www.archives.gov/electronic_records_archives/pdf/configuration_management_plan.pdf) there is an instantiation by the ERA PMO. Other additional info helping in writing a SCMP are in http://cs.wwc.edu/~aabyan/435/Configuration.html.
                 
                Hoping this info could be helpful,
                 
                Best regards,
                Luigi Buglione
                -----Original Message-----
                From: Gerhard.Tekes (Telematic) [mailto:gerhard.tekes@...]
                Sent: martedì 31 agosto 2004 17.26
                To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [CMMi Process Improvement] Organizational Policy

                Hi Luigi,
                As we don`t have any policie for configuration management yet in the company, I was very interested to see some examples. But the link (web1.ssg.....) is broken. Do you have any other link?
                 
                TYVM and regards from Brazil
                 
                -------
                Gerhard J. Tekes
                gerhard.tekes@...
                www.telematic.com.br
                Tel: + 55 (71) 369.8655
                Fax: + 55 (71) 379.0324
                Cel: + 55 (71) 9148.6691
                 
                Agility is not an inescapable law of purity but a pragmatic principle of effectiveness. -- Marc Hamann
                 
                 
                ----- Original Message -----
                Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 5:02 AM
                Subject: RE: [CMMi Process Improvement] Organizational Policy

                Hello Rick,
                 
                CMMI defines in its glossary the organizational policy as "A guiding principle typically established by senior management that is adopted by an organization to influence and determine decisions". As you know, for each PA there is an elaboration of the GP2.1, indicating the "what" should contain such policy.
                The suggestion is to apply the "5W's+H rule" to each OP, explictly indicating the "who, what, why, where, when, and how" within a certain elaboration.
                 
                Some examples found on the net for taking ideas are in the SEP web site (https://web1.ssg.gunter.af.mil/sep/SEP/menus/main.asp?.8391044569124197): you can browse and access documents (including policies) from the menu on the left, going to the "Document Breakout" item and then choosing a sub-item.
                 
                Other suggestions and comments about this issue are from Pat O'Toole, in particular about establishing organizational policies and not CMM policies (http://www.awprofessional.com/articles/article.asp?p=27124) but don't using them as behavioural guidelines (http://www.awprofessional.com/articles/article.asp?p=27019).
                 
                Hoping this info could be helpful,
                 
                Best regards,
                Luigi Buglione
                 
                -----Original Message-----
                From: rw_ricky_wood [mailto:ricky.wood@...]
                Sent: martedì 17 agosto 2004 15.55
                To: cmmi_process_improvement@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [CMMi Process Improvement] Organizational Policy

                I am developing a policy for a CMMI level 2 process area. I would
                like to have some guidance on what to put exactly in a policy.
                CMMI demands that an organizational policy is established for each
                process area. In the elaboration paragraph, it is stated: "This
                policy establishes organizational expectations for....
                Does that mean that in the policy at a minimum we need to specify
                who (what function or department) in the technology organization is
                responsible for specific process steps (a at detail similar to a
                generic or specific practice?). Would this be a good thing to do?

                References to good example of such policies are always welcome.

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