Skip to main content
Log in

Experiences with the capability maturity model in a research environment

  • Papers
  • Published:
Software Quality Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes a project aimed at the evaluation of the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) in the context of a research organization. The evaluation was done at the Winand Staring Centre (a Dutch research organization). Part of the evaluation was a standard CMM-assessment. It was found that CMM could be applied to a research organization, although its five maturity levels were considered to be rather rigid. It was felt to be a disadvantage, especially by management, that business goals were not explicitly taken into account by CMM. It turned out that the process of doing an assessment is more important than the assessment itself! The assessment process introduced to the organization a ‘language’ which encouraged discussion of the software development process and its improvement. This topic was hardly discussed before the assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. van der Velden, M.J., Hendriks, P.R.H. and Udink ten Cate, A.J. Software process improvement in a research environment. In Software Quality Management III Vol. 1: Quality Management (Computational Mechanics Publications, Southampton 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Paulk, M.C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M.B. and Weber, C.V. Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1, Report No. CMU/SEI-93-TR-24, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, USA, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  3. ISO 9000-3 Quality Management and Quality Assurance Standards-Part 3: Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001 to the development, supply and maintenance of software, International Organization for Standardization, Genève, Switzerland, 1991.

  4. TickIT, TickIT-Guide to Software Quality Management System Construction and Certification using ISO 9001/EN 29001, British Computer Society, 1990.

  5. Koch, G.R. Process assessment: the ‘BOOTSTRAP’ approach, Information and Software Technology, 35 (1993) 387–402.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dorling, A. SPICE: Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination, Information and Software Technology, 35 (1993) 404–406.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Humphrey, W.S. Managing the Software Process (Addison-Wesley, Reading MA, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Grant, E.L. and Leavenworth, R.S. Statistical Quality Control, 6th edn, McGraw-Hill Series in Industrial Engineering and Management Science, (J.L. Riggs, ed.) (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Goodman, P. The practical implementation of process improvement initiatives. In CSR Tenth Annual Workshop on Application of Software Metrics and Quality Assurance in Industry. Centre for Software Reliability, London University, 1993.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van der Velden, M.J., Vreke, J., van der Wal, B. et al. Experiences with the capability maturity model in a research environment. Software Qual J 5, 87–95 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00419772

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00419772

Keywords

Navigation