What are the continuous assurance auditing activities that the organization will need to implement to help achieve CMMI Level 3

The word "auditing" doesn't appear in the model, other than "configuration audits."

The CMMI’s Process Area “Process and Product Quality Assurance” in v1.3, and “Process Quality Assurance” in V2.0, provide the primary guidance in the CMMI for continuous quality evaluations.

PPQA/PQA calls for “Objective Evaluation” of Processes and Work Products
(SP1.1 and SP1.2), and then management of the remediation, data collection, and corrections (SP2.1 and SP2.2).

In addition, the CMMI calls for a clear policy, resources, training, metrics, improvement, tailoring, and evaluation of the process/performance itself.

In this context, “Process” is behavior, and “Work Products” are artifacts/systems. You can’t perform these activities by just looking at documents - you’ll need to observe, interview, or talk with people.

As to scope, frequency, and duration, it depends on the context. Complex, high-risk projects should have broad, frequent evaluations, whereas long-term static programs probably can do something lighter.

The key to success on this is to focus on “how” people are doing their work. This is the most likely thing to help you success (or fail).

Good luck!

Jeff Dalton is author of Great Big Agile: An OS for Agile Leaders, and is a CMMI SCAMPI Lead Appraiser, AgileCxO Assessor, and Leadership Coach.

Can a project perform PPQA on themselves?

Is it possible to use the project team to achieve PPQA SG1?

We have an idea to use the project team to assure the process using checklists and peer reviews, so the QA just audits work products AND assure that the project team do the checklists or peer reviews.

Is it enough for PPQA SG1?

If you've been following my posts you'll know that I'm not one to say that anything is absolute within the CMMI - local tailoring to accommodate culture and local norms is very important. So, I never say never . . . but . . . .

The PPQA PA specifically calls out the need to "objectively" evaluate processes AND the use of those processes.  It doesn't say "independent" though, but it would be uncommon for an organization to be mature and open enough when first implementing PPQA to perform this objectively on themselves.  Many Lead Appraisers insist on "Independence" to prove objectivity.  This isn't always correct though.

The other problem is that PPQA is the "eyes and ears" of the process deployment effort.  It's job is NOT to be the "process police," it's to uncover problems with the use of the process and make sure that information gets into the hands of the right people and is used appropriately.

One idea I advocate is a "rotating" PPQA responsibility.  PMs and Engineers from other projects serve for a period of time in a PPQA role (say 25% of their time for six months).  This has the hidden benefit of gaining "buy-in" from people who may not be fully engaged, and creates process evangelists. 

www.broadswordsolutions.com

How do I get smart FAST about PPQA?

I've been assigned the PPQA process area at my company and I don't know much about it. How do I get smart FAST about the practices?



How to get smart fast? OK, first get some #8 AWG/3 wire and and a plasma welder .. . .

I would start by simply reading the PPQA PA making sure to read the informative material (in other words, the whole chapter). Remember that PPQA has multiple purposes - one focuses on "are we using the process?" and "is the process appropriate?" The other is, "what insight can we gain by understanding these two things?" Is the process useable? Is it helping people? How can we make it better?There are numerous books on the CMMI that could help you - one that I like because of its organic approach is Mike West's "Real Process Improvement with the CMMI."

Good luck! And don't hurt yourself!

www.broadswordsolutions.com