CMMI as a Developmental Model
Since the CMMI® is in some ways a developmental model, it may help us to better understand its strengths and weaknesses if we compare it to other, more general, developmental models.
The Integral Approach, as espoused by Ken Wilber and others, is a much broader system that can be applied to individuals, to organizations and to entire societies. It too includes a developmental model, with levels identified by colors rather than numbers, as well as another dimension subdivided into quadrants.
When we compare the levels of the Integral model to the Capability Maturity Models of the SEI, we find significant congruence.
| CMMI Level | CMMI Characterization | Integral Characterization | Integral Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Incomplete: barely functional. | Archaic: focused solely on immediate survival needs, minimal sense of self. | Infrared |
| 1 | Initial: ad hoc, chaotic; success depends on individual heroics. | Fundamental: impulsive, possessing faith in magic and superheros. | Magenta |
| 2 | Repeatable: basic project management capabilities in place, project success is aided by strong oversight from project managers and managers. | Egocentric: people organize themselves based on power hierarchies, with the most powerful individuals leading the weaker. | Red |
| 3 | Defined: individuals and groups conform to organizational standards. | Absolutistic: people organize themselves around mythic, fundamentalist principles of truth, with groups requiring close conformity to their particular principles, but with no reliable way to make value judgments comparing one group’s “truth” to another’s. | Amber |
| 4 | Managed: decisions are based on quantitative measures. | Rational: society advances based on use of the scientific method; quantitative methods are introduced that allow people to make objective decisions about what is true and what is false. | Orange |
| n/a | No equivalent. | Pluralistic: acknowledges that there are multiple, valid ways of perceiving reality, and tries to accept all people and life forms by placing value on diversity. | Green |
| 5 | Optimizing: continuously improving in a measurable way using quantitative management techniques. | Integral: sees the importance of the earlier levels, and of the developmental model as a whole; while still acknowledging the value of diversity, also recognizes the validity of healthy value hierarchies. | Teal |
In addition to levels, the Integral model recognizes four distinct quadrants of human knowledge and experience, divided along the lines of subjective/objective, and individual/collective.
Correspondingly, the SEI publishes two companions to the CMMI, the Personal Software Process (PSP) and the Team Software Process (TSP), which match up nicely with the individual/collective views in the Integral model. The SEI also certifies appraisers who, after interviews and review of documentation, can provide objective feedback that may well be different than an organization’s subjective feelings about how well it is progressing.
Implications
The application of the Integral model suggests several important points in terms of the validity and value of the CMMI.
Supports the use of a hierarchical developmental model. Like the CMMI, the Integral approach posits the need for a developmental model that proceeds through a series of levels, with each level building on and extending the prior ones.
Supports the general definition and sequence of the CMMI levels. The close correlation between Integral and CMMI levels suggests that the latter’s prescribed levels are generally valid.
Indicates some potential deficiencies in the CMMI model. When comparing these two approaches, there are two areas of the Integral model that have no close correlates in CMMI. The first of these is the Green level, with its emphasis on inclusion, plurality and diversity. The second is the emphasis on interior, subjective states and feelings.
The existence of these gaps may to some degree account for the appearance of the Manifesto for Agile Software Development in 2001. The first part of this declaration states that the group of seventeen original authors value “individuals and interactions over processes and tools.” The entire Agile Manifesto is contained on only a few Web pages, and consists of a set of core values and very general principles, as opposed to the CMMI’s extensive set of prescribed practices.
While many software developers welcomed the appearance of the Agile manifesto as a valuable counterweight to the influence of the CMMI, several Agile authors have noted a distressing response from some members of their audience that is strikingly similar to what the Integral model calls the “Pre/Trans Fallacy.” This misapprehension consists of the confusion of pre-personal states of consciousness with transpersonal states: in more concrete terms, perhaps, confusion of an extreme state of inebriation with an intense meditative state. In a similar fashion, some misguided agile enthusiasts have confused the sophistication and flexibility of the agile approach with a total lack of any systematic approach at all: something not intended by any of the original agile proponents.
Suggests that CMMI definition and usage may not be consistent with its model. While the CMMI model seems nicely integral on its surface, the weight of its definition, the rigor of its prescriptions and the effort necessary to obtain independent validation all seem to indicate an Amber worldview that requires strict conformity to the group’s defined rules in order for people to be accepted as members. In this respect as well, the Agile approach also seems to provide an effective alternative to what some might call the fundamentalist excesses of the CMMI approach.
Conclusions
Consistent with the intentions of the Integral approach — to honor and integrate as much of the world’s truth as possible — this analysis suggests that both the CMMI and the Agile Manifesto have important pieces of the truth, and indicates ways in which these two schools of thought might be better integrated, to the ultimate benefit of all software developers and users.
Separate the maturity scale, the values and the principles of the CMMI from the recommended practices, to create a model that is more flexible and inclusive.
Add another level to the CMMI to specifically address the pluralism of the Integral Green level.
Add guidance to the CMMI to specifically address the expected interior states and feelings of software developers at each level of the model.
April 4, 2009
Next: Art as Apple Strategy