Re: Do You Get What You Measure?

Nick Malik [Microsoft] wrote:

In CMM terms, level 2 is the repeatable level - pretty much what I
would suggest the majority of s/w teams are trying to achieve (based
on my probably incorrect observation).

Repeatable in which sense?

I could imagine that for an Agile team, adaptability and reliability
are more important...


I think you misunderstand. Using Scrum or XP, there are very
specific rules about what you do, and when, and who. Scrum has daily
"stand up" meetings and monthly sprints. XP has pair programming and
the planning game. These are rules that are not to be broken.

That's a common misunderstanding - at least about XP:
http://www.xprogramming.com/xpmag/jatNotRules.htm

By
following them, you provide repeatability to the development PROCESS
so that creativity can flow properly to solving the business problem.

How does a repeatable process allow creativity to "flow"? Serious question.

Level 3 is probably the holy grail of teams that focus only on
methodologies as being the savior of everything [this is where I
have a poke at the agile and eXtreme folks :) ].

I don't get the point about Agility/XP here.


Agile methods rarely define what Levels 4 or 5 look like, while CMM
clearly expects you to refine your system beyond stability,
repeatability, and forecasting.

I'm not sure I would say that XP "expects you" to do anything - I like to
think about it more as suggestions. On the other hand I'd say that the
XP/Agile community clearly values and discusses those things that you group
under CMM levels 4 and 5.

Level 3 is about a development process that is so predictable that
you can plan and predict the outcome. Level 4 is about finding the
things that are predictable, but not effective, and making them both
predictable and effective. In other words, Level 2 means making it
work, Level 3 is knowing it works, and Level 4 is being able to make
it work better.

Mhh, what I've learned about tuning a process, I've learned from Agile
community - iteration retrospectives and the like.

Just found this on page 28 in "Extreme Programming Explained, 2nd ed.:
"[...] the point of XP, which is excellence in software development through
improvement. The cycle is to do the best you can today, striving for the
awareness and understanding necessary to do better tomorrow."

Level 5 is changing the system to respond to outside factors. In
other words, we got it to run and run well, now we need to change it
because something else has changed (competition, internal company
strategy, marketplace, etc).

I'm not sure why this has to be separate from level 4 - probably because
those factors are traditionally outside the awareness of the development
team. It's amazing how much difference close communication with "outside"
stakeholders make.

Of course you are right, though, that XP doesn't tell those stakeholders how
to know about the outside changes they should monitor, should that be your
point.

Cheers, Ilja


.