Introduction

The criteria to optimize a responsive and advanced software mechanism are passed through different levels of capability maturity model. It cannot be denied that the maturity of particular software in an organization needs to be identified for managing the future development process of software. The levels of capability maturity model allow an organization or an individual developer to critically identify development constraints of a software development process. This report has undertaken an evaluative approach to define the key practical application of CMM that assists in measurement of software maturity. Furthermore, the report has highlighted different levels of CMM and their particular role in software evaluation process.

Defining the practices of CMM

The key practices of capability maturity model include assessment of software process, capability of software and amend the relevant feedbacks received from a particular industry or IT organization. These general practices of CMM allow a developer to hit the critical requirement of user and upgrade the software for better usage. It has been highlighted that capability maturity development process helps an organization such as to make initial planning, develop and perform needed changes in the software [1]. The statement of author can be considered as an appropriate method for inducting a systematic approach in measuring the current state of software. It has been noticed by IT professionals that CMM are particularly implied by a group of trained software engineers in identifying the critical issues that has halted the business of an organization. This particular element does not only determine the capability of software but also influences the support of organization in altering the basic module of any particular software.

However, one of the key practices of CMM is to evaluate the software performance by conducting a running error [4]. The argumentative comment from author derives that CMM converts an ad hoc process of software evaluation to a more centralized and disciplined approach that could maintain the procedural development of software. The most important aspect of CMM is that it identifies the inherent structure of an organization for determining the best approach for software evaluation. In order to have maximum influence over software measurement, CMM identifies the key requirement of a system that can accommodate the allocation of software. This particular process allows CMM to determine whether the customers are internal or external in nature so that probable relationship between customer and supplier can be garnered. On the contrary, it can be opined that CMM allows an organization to track the appropriate action that can be implemented in anticipating the relationship between products of software and tasks that are initialized through that software [2]. It allows the senior management member to comment and review the software process that can be aligned with company business objective. Another key practice that can be identified is review the quality management of software. This particular practice of authorizing the quality of software verifies the intergroup coordination for maintaining the boundary that makes a distinctive approach from organization practice and projects that are executed from particular software. The involvement of CMM allows an IT or manufacturing organization to maintain the flexible approach and stabilized process correcting the errors of particular software.

Conceptual framework for CMM practice

CMM considers four alternate approach for evaluating and measuring of software that are organizational database of software process, software library, software development life cycle and standard procedure that are practiced in an organization. In order to determine a particular software development process, it is necessary for CMM to allocate system as well as external requirement of software. The viewpoint of IT professionals has clarified that system and software’s external requirement helps in determining the primary element that can be included in development life cycle of software [3].

The lifecycle phases of CMM led software process also induct architectural information of software. This particular identification of software architecture helps in highlighting the standard that an organization particularly follows to maintain their software process. However, the accumulation of this information is important to authenticate the primary requirement of organization and also approve the life cycle phases of software by organizational management. One of the reason that can be cited to accumulate organization approval and software process assists in long term maintenance and improvement of organizational software.

Levels of CMM

The capability maturity model measures a software process with the help of five different levels that has a function on their own. It can be highlighted that five levels of capability maturity model are initialization, repeatable, defining, manage and optimization of software [10]. The function of different levels of CMM is described below:

Initialization- Level 1

The initialization level of capability maturity model is inclined toward garnering the expectation and user interface information so that a probable software process can be followed. The importance of initial level helps an organization to determine a stabilized environment that can intensify the maintenance and development process of software [12]. In order to have proper planning of software, the primary level of CMM (Initial level) assists in evaluating the coding as well as testing platform for proper quality management of software. This particular level is responsible for developer or an organization to determine the chaos that surrounds the software process and also document elements that cannot be considered repeatable.

Restrictive elements cannot be properly defined by the relevant software process which is considered to be the primary reason for not allowing them into repeatable level of CMM model.

Figure 1: CMM levels

(Source: [1])

Repeatable- Level 2

The successive level of software process in CMM is repeatable level that inducts certain policies which are needed to manage and follow the procedural steps are implemented. The primary policy such as amendment of customer requirement and potentiality of software needs to be inducted. It has been noted that developers generally considers those evaluative process that can be repeated in the life cycle phases of software development. In order to mark the process or activities that can be considered for repetition every software process needs to be documented and measured so that similar elements can be repeated without identifying the nature of those elements.

It can be suggested that tracking of software project can help in measuring the cost and functionality of software [13]. This particular practice can help in meeting the issues software process with relevant solution. The standards for software projects need to be well managed and followed so that a strong relationship between primary customers and organization can be well maintained. A realistic plan for software projects are backed by project management system that does not only increases the performance of software evaluation but also determine the success rate that can be repeated in the successive levels.

Defining- Level 3

The defining level of CMM determines a particular standard that can be utilized for development and management of software quality. This particular level of CMM does not only document the software process but also integrate repetition for coherent approach of software maintenance. It has been noticed that every technically inclined organization inducts a SEPG group also known as (Software Engineering Process Group) that validates the software quality and takes influential steps for upgrading the life cycle stages of software. It has been well said that level 3 of CMM is a maturity level that has attained all the basic requirements of an organization [15]. This group ensures that all the technical staff of an organization that belong to IT, retail and manufacturing industries have necessary skills to maintain their roles in software management task.

On the contrary, it has been noticed that software tailoring process provides an investigative approach that could empower a developer to find critical issues in software and also amend it with relevant solution. This particular process of project tailoring is considered to be as the coherent approach of CMM software project tracking technique. It can be utilized for not only managing the quality of software but also highlighting the engineering aspect of software process. The tracking of software project within an established cost and schedule of software process helps in stable process of software development.

Manage- Level 4

The control over software evaluation process is conducted through collection of data of past software projects. It helps in conducting an analysis of software process and also monitors the developmental cycle. This particular level maintains the quality of software project and relies on maximum productivity of the organization. The collection of past project data helps in determining whether the current software process has undertaken an appropriate approach or not. It has been opined that quantitative objectives of an organization can be achieved by monitoring the process of software development [6]. This does not only help in realizing the statistical performance of the software process but also empower the process for mitigating future issues with software evaluation. Level 4 of CMM makes a process predictable by measuring the operational and quality of the software.

Optimization- Level 5

The optimization level is the last stage of software evaluation that inducts both testing as well as up gradation of particular software. In this level CMM allows IT specific organizations to find out relevant strength of software process. It could help the organization to not only determine the cost but also conduct a cost benefit analysis. This particular process can be used extensively for innovative approaches that can be applied in different sector of organization. The collection of data is a primary step for conducting cost benefit analysis and also helps in following the procedural steps of organizational software process. It has been pointed out that SEPG can help in determining the basic cause of the defects that are found in the evaluation process [8].

This particular level allows the software process to stop any repetition of errors and implementation of similar measures to other relevant software projects. Organizations that have reached the optimization level are considered to be progressing toward development. It also signifies that capability of software evaluation process can be improved along with that improvement in induction process of advanced technology is a possible reality. (Refer to Appendix)

Determining the role of CMM in software evaluation and measurement

The primary role of CMM in software evaluation process is to identify probable standard of software process that can help in repetition of particular element for overcoming the restrictive element. This particular model is extensively utilized by technical group for providing a brief overview on development protocol of software process. It can be stated that CMM act as a interactive link between software evaluation project and technical groups such as (SEPG) [5]. Below given KPA (Key Performance Indicators) are satisfied by the implementation of CMM:

Commitment for performance

The implementation of CMM in software evaluation helps an organization to establish elements that can allow software process to induct policy that are particularly made for stating the link between software projects and performance. It can be verified that policy statements inducts those approaches that are inducted from level 2 of CMM [14]. It also stresses on the fact that monitoring of software process helps in identifying issues.

Ability for performance

The involvement of CMM in software measurement process signifies the importance of trained individual in the group and also a stable financial amount is invested to met monetary expenses. The activity of CMM enables a preparatory development plan such as determining the system requirement and other prerequisite for software management.

Activities for performance

In order to make relevant progress in the performance measure of software evaluation process two distinct types of measurement plans namely formal and informal plan are followed. The formal plan of CMM led process contains preparatory plan such as software management plan, quality assurance plan for effective evaluation of software [7]. On the contrary, informal plan include consider probable risk and reviews the formal plan that has been undertaken by CMM. It has been noticed that CMM helps in linking the customer requirement from particular software and particularly identifies specific allocation that can be implemented in system design. In order to maintain the relation between customer and supplier, the CMM includes both technical as well as non-technical set of requirements that are functionalities, software management cost and delivery date.

Measurement

CMM makes sure that relevant practice that resonates with system and customer requirement are being inducted so that the whole software process can be analyzed [9]. This analysis is usually conducted to not only measure the variant need but also makes software evaluation approach a process of mitigating any redundancy in software.

Verification of implementation

The final approval of CMM approach is verified under the guidance of senior management that can help in performing the required activity for software measurement. The involvement of organizational management members is needed to certify the time bound nature of software process so that customer requirement can be achieved. CMM is considered to be the primary influence for software quality assurance that verifies the intergroup coordination in software measurement analysis [11].

Conclusion

From the aforementioned points, it can be concluded that CMM (Capability Maturity Model) inducts Initialization, Repeatable, Defining, Management and Optimization level for software evaluative. These variant levels help in identification of particular redundancy in organizational software and also neutralize it with relevant solution. CMM promotes a disciplined approach for software evaluation and also contain software architectural information for better development life cycle stages. CMM ensures that it identifies those elements that cannot be considered as restriction for software evaluation process and inducts them into software process as a means of repetition. A preparatory plan for software evaluation is deemed necessary for better evaluation and also record higher performance. CMM also helps in the success of software evaluation process by garnering information such as system and customer requirement from organizational software.

Reference List

[1] S. Ali and S.U. Khan. “Software outsourcing partnership model: An evaluation framework for vendor organizations,” in Journal of systems and software, Vol. 117, 2016, pp.402-425.

[2] V. Garousi, M. Felderer and T. Hacaloğlu. “What we know about software test maturity and test process improvement”. In IEEE Software, Vol. 35(1), 2018, pp.84-92.

[3] S. Titov, G. Bubnov, M. Guseva, A. Lyalin and I. Brikoshina. “Capability maturity models in engineering companies: case study analysis”. In ITM Web of Conferences, Vol. 6, 2016, p. 03002. EDP Sciences.

[4] S. Butzer, S. Schötz and R. Steinhilper. “Remanufacturing process capability maturity model”. Procedia Manufacturing, 8, 2017, pp.715-722.

[5] V. Garousi, M. Felderer and T. Hacaloğlu. ”Software test maturity assessment and test process improvement: A multivocal literature review”. In Information and Software Technology, Vol. 85, 2017, pp.16-42.

[6] L. Gren, R. Torkar, and R. Feldt. “The prospects of a quantitative measurement of agility: A validation study on an agile maturity model”. Journal of Systems and Software, 107, 2015, pp.38-49.

[7] C. Nesensohn, D. Bryde, D.E. Ochieng and D. Fearon. Maturity and maturity models in lean construction, 2015, pp. 45-59.

[8] T.C. Lacerda and C.G. von Wangenheim. “Systematic literature review of usability capability/maturity models” Computer Standards & Interfaces, 55, 2018, pp.95-105.

[9] N. Carroll and M. Helfert. “Service capabilities within open innovation: Revisiting the applicability of capability maturity models” Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(2), 2015, pp.275-303.

[10] K.B. Yeh, M.L. Adams, E.S. Marshall, D. Dasgupta, A. Zhunushov, A.L. Richards and J. Hay. “Applying a Capability Maturity Model (CMM) to evaluate global health security-related research programmes in under-resourced areas” Global Security: Health, Science and Policy, 2(1), 2017, pp.1-9.

[11] C.J. Torrecilla-Salinas, J. Sedeño M.J. Escalona and M. Mejías. “Agile, Web Engineering and Capability Maturity Model Integration: A systematic literature review” Information and Software Technology, 71, 2016, pp.92-107.

[12] K.J. Wang, J. Widagdo, Y.S. Lin, H.L. Yang and S.L. Hsiao. “ A service innovation framework for start-up firms by integrating service experience engineering approach and capability maturity model” Service Business, 10(4), 2016, pp.867-916.

[13] M.P. Cristescu and A.M.R., Stancu. “USING THE INTEGRATED CAPABILITY AND MATURITY MODEL IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OF SOFTWARE SYSTEMS,” in Revista Economica, Vol. 70(4), 2018, pp.20-33.

[14] M.N. Mahmood, S.P. Dhakal, A. Wiewiora, R. Keast and K. Brown. “Towards an integrated maturity model of asset management capabilities” In Proceedings of the 7th World Congress on Engineering Asset Management (WCEAM 2012), 2015, pp. 431-441. Springer, Cham.

[15] V. Henriques and M. Tanner. “A systematic literature review of agile and maturity model research,” in Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, Vol. 12, 2017, pp.053-073.