CMMI – News and Views

It seems that too  many organizations lack the leadership to carry through the full implications of their desired improvements in ways of working.  When we look at CMMI, we see leadership being expressed through two of the generic practices at all levels.  Generic practice 2.10 emphasizes the importance of regular review activities with the leadership (aka higher level management) – a key aspect of these review activities is the opportunity to review policy. The existence of policy is demanded by generic practice 2.1.

So why is policy seen to be so important as an expression of leadership in an organization. Policy is part of the leadership mechanism – quite simply, it shows the organization exactly what is expected in terms of overall behaviour. When it is adequately enforced (is that too strong a word?) the behaviour of the organization is brought into line with the policy. Making policy work for the organization in this way is a critical responsibility of the leadership – one that it too often fails over.

Both the carrot and the stick can be used to enforce policy. If the leadership want better planning, they must show leadershp by using better planning themselves. Otherwise it just becomes

do what I say

rather than

do what I do

Placing policy objectives in staff personal plans is all fine and good, but the policy can be subverted by a conspiracy of management and staff – paying lip service to the importance of policy, but ignoring its essence. Adherence to policy should be rewarded and inappropriate avoidance of policy should be punished. Fundamentally staff who follow policy should, on average, be better rewarded and more promoted than staff who do not.

Policy needn’t be a straight-jacket for the organization, stopping behaviour that everyone in the organization desires. All too often, policy sounds threatening, but remember it not only sets expectations, when used properly in the organization it also sets safeguards for staff. If staff want the opportunity to continue “heroic” delivery in the face of operational need, then there should be a policy that supports this. Once we have a policy, it can be surrounded with appropriate controls and revised at some point in the future when it ceases to be appropriate. Once staff get a life and stop wanting to effect heroic delivery, then the policy can be reviewed and staff protected from the need to effect heroic delivery again.

To be effective, policy is something that is enforced – there is some level of pain associated with ignoring policy (and behaving differently) – even if that pain is only the need to obtain and maintain a waiver. Consequently the organization must have a safety valve. No policy is forever, so policies must be reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they are still meeting organizational needs, are not acting as a constraint reducing the organization’s effectiveness and are not constraining new and effective ways of working or technology.

Policy acts as a guide. If a policy creates behaviours of a certain type, then work will be delivered as a result of these behaviours (else, stop it). The work manifest in the behaviours should be planned, so in organizations where policy is effective, the influence of policy will be consistently visible in plans of all types.

Policy is an important manifestation of leadership within an organization. It shows that the leadership is sufficiently foresighted to encourage common behaviour amongst its staff. The frequent review of policy shows that organizations are listening and responding to change within the organization and the way it works. Without clear policy, we can be pretty certain that there is no clear leadership. Without clear leadership change will be infinitely more difficult.

Well despite the worst that volcanic ash can do CMMI made Practical 2010 is going strong.  As I write Chris Webb from Thales has given a very well received talk that set the scene on a well structured and effective improvement programme that is delivering an up to date operating environment into his division.  Chris is using CMMI to provide direction and structure and Lean to provide focussed process improvements.  The programme is seeking to unlock the hidden potential in the workforce by providing them effective and fit for purpose processes, by addressing knowledge skills and behaviours and culture.  Lastly Chris went back to the “untapped potential” point by using the analogy of an iceberg.  The portion above water represents their recognised skills, knowledge, rules and routines.  ”Under the water” lie all that past experience and knowledge.  Chris’s programme is seeking to provide the environment within which that “water mark” can be lowered so liberating staff to perform to even higher capability.

Paul Nielsen (CEO of the SEI) was unfortunately trapped in the US because of the ash but he was able to present via video link up and delivered an fascinating and scene setting talk that emphasised how incredibly complex the development and acquisition space has become over the last 30 years as increasingly large amounts of functionality are delivered by software – so what we are increasingly building/procuring is complex systems of systems – and we neglect this fact at our peril.

Col Sigurd Heier runs the Norwegian Armed Forces Signals unit with a large staff distributed across many bases across Norway.  Col Heier has instigated an organisation wide improvement programme designed to build “one support unit” linked and united by common vows, vision and values.  He explained how one of the key pillars is building a consistent way of working using CMMI Service as the engine to direct and inform.  Col Heier moved onto explain how underpinning this initiative is a strong focus on People, Culture, Service and Systems and how he is building a small initial cadre of staff with a strong committed interest in process improvement and realising his vision – these staff are distributed amongst the line.

Was with a process improvement programme manager this morning.  He’s leaving his interesting CMMI improvement role.  Not because CMMI has been put on hold in his company or because he’s not enjoying the job.  He just wanted a new challenge and to try living in a new city for a bit.

Speaking to a portfolio manager from another company this afternoon.  His organisation is managing a risk that the better process improvement contractors may leave to take on new opportunities.

Tell me if I am just viewing the world selectively to find evidence that backs my case that “the climate” is feeling a lot pleasanter than this time last year?