It’s the 21st century, and every company is trying to become the superior one among its competitors, but in this technological era, only product attributes are not sufficient to stand out in the crowd.
Organizations need to take the help of hardware and software services to face the competition.
To assist organizations in developing software strategies, certain behaviour models are used which measure the success and growth graph of these services. CMM and CMMI are two such tools engaged in guiding organizations in the field of software maturity and other processes.
Key Takeaways
- CMM focuses on software engineering and management processes, whereas CMMI focuses on product development and maintenance.
- CMM uses a five-level maturity model to assess the organization’s processes, while CMMI uses a staged representation.
- CMMI incorporates best practices from various disciplines, while CMM focuses solely on software engineering.
CMM vs CMMI
Capability Maturity Model (CMM) is a five-level evolutionary path model used to develop and refine an organization’s software development process. CMM Integrated is a process and behavioural model that helps organizations to develop behaviours that decrease risks in service, product, and software development.
CMM was developed as an assessment model by the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University in 1990.
This model’s main task was measuring the maturity levels of a software development process in an organization. The term CMM stands for Capability Maturity Model and measures an organization’s software practices based on five stages.
While CMMI stands for Capability Maturity Model Integration, it is a successor of CMM and a more revolutionized software development model.
It allows the incorporation of multiple disciplines per the organisation’s needs and wants. This model consists of five stages different from the previous model’s stages.
Comparison Table
| Parameters of Comparison | CMM | CMMI |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | CMM stands for Capability Maturity Model. | CMMI stands for Capability Maturity Model Integration. |
| Meaning | It is a behavior model developed to measure an organization’s software development process. | It is a successor of the CMM model and is more effective and task-oriented. |
| Developed in | The year 1990 | The year 2006 |
| Purpose | To evaluate the process maturity levels in software. | To combine many software models into one and to overcome the drawbacks of CMM. |
| Stages | This model has five stages: Initial Repeat Defined Managed Optimized. | This model has five stages, too: Initial Managed Defined Quantitively managed Optimized. |
| Efficiency | Less effective one | More effective one |
What is CMM?
Developed by the Software Engineering Institute in the year 1990, CMM emerged as a behavioural model which measured the maturity of software to determine how it should be developed further.
It was primarily designed to assist the defence system of the U.S. but eventually made its debut in the general software world also.
CMM lists down some specific activities and asks the organization to undertake those. If the organization successfully performs all the tasks, the model assumes that it will achieve success.
This hampers the actual evaluation as the only completion of a task does not guarantee success for any organization.
CMM has various branches in it, such as Software CMM and People CMM. This does not provide an integrated approach to the process and increases the workload. The model also focuses on a lot of paperwork which consumes so much time.
Following are the five stages included in this model, along with a brief description:
- Initial (defines a newbie organization that does not have a process yet)
- Repeat (defines an organization that repeats some of the processes)
- Defined (defines an organization having a set of the standard process)
- Managed (defines an organization having control over these processes)
- Optimized (defines an organization that uses quantitative tools to bring improvement in the process)
What is CMMI?
CMMI was developed in the year 2006 as a successor to the CMM. It was developed by the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University to overcome the drawbacks of the CMM.
This model not only focuses on the tasks but also pays attention to the success rate and performance of these tasks.
It measures how an organization performs even after completing the tasks and suggests changes accordingly. This model integrates all the branches of CMM and provides a better and more integrated approach.
This model has the following five stages:
- Initial (defines an organization having poor and unpredictable processes)
- Managed (defines an organization that has managed all its requirements and resources)
- Defined (defines an organization having more detailed processes)
- Quantitively managed (defines an organization that has all the previous goals)
- Optimized (focuses on continually improving processes)
Main Differences Between CMM and CMMI
- CMM was developed in the year 1990, while CMMI was developed in the year 2006.
- CMM stands for Capability Maturity Model. Meanwhile, CMMI stands for Capability Maturity Model Integration.
- CMM was developed as the first major software maturity evaluating model, while CMMI emerged as the successor for CMM to overcome its shortcomings.
- Both CMM and CMMI have five stages in their model, but the stages are different from each other. In contrast, CMM has- Initial, Repeat, Defined, Managed, and Optimized. CMMI has Initial, Managed, Defined, Quantitively Managed, and Optimized.
- CMM measures an organization’s success based on specific tasks that the organization performs. It does not pay much attention to the results. In contrast, CMMI measures the results while evaluating the maturity levels.
References
I’ve put so much effort writing this blog post to provide value to you. It’ll be very helpful for me, if you consider sharing it on social media or with your friends/family. SHARING IS ♥️
The development of the CMM and CMMI models has greatly contributed to the evolution of software development practices. It’s fascinating to see how these models have adapted to address the changing needs and challenges of the industry over time.
The CMMI model provides a more integrated and effective approach to software development, especially compared to the CMM model. It was developed to overcome the drawbacks of the CMM and does a better job of assessing an organization’s performance once tasks are completed.
I completely agree with your perspective. The CMMI model seems to be a more useful and modern model for evaluating an organization’s software development processes.
Both the CMM and CMMI models are crucial for organizations looking to improve their software development processes. CMM focuses on software engineering and management processes, whereas CMMI focuses on product development and maintenance. It’s important for organizations to understand the differences between the two models and determine which one best suits their needs.
You’ve highlighted an important distinction between CMM and CMMI. Organizations must carefully consider their specific requirements before choosing a model to guide their software development strategies.
The comprehensive comparison of CMM and CMMI provided in this article is valuable for organizations seeking to understand the nuances of these models. It’s crucial to have a clear understanding of each model’s purpose and characteristics before implementing them in a software development environment.
I appreciate your emphasis on the importance of understanding the nuanced differences between CMM and CMMI. This clarity is essential for organizations as they navigate the complexities of software development processes.
Your insights highlight the significance of informed decision-making when it comes to selecting the most suitable model for guiding software development processes. Clarity on the unique attributes of CMM and CMMI is key to making well-informed choices.
The comparison of CMM and CMMI provided in this article offers valuable insights into the evolution of software development models. Understanding the distinct features and strengths of each model is essential for organizations looking to enhance their software processes.
Your emphasis on the importance of understanding the unique features of CMM and CMMI is insightful. Organizations must carefully assess their specific requirements to determine the most suitable model for their software development strategies.
I echo your sentiments regarding the significance of understanding the distinct strengths of CMM and CMMI. This understanding is crucial for organizations as they aim to optimize their software development processes.
The CMMI model’s emphasis on incorporating best practices from various disciplines makes it a valuable tool for organizations seeking to improve their software development processes. By integrating multiple disciplines, CMMI offers a more comprehensive approach to guiding an organization’s development strategies.
Your insights on the benefits of the CMMI model are spot-on. The ability to combine multiple software models into one framework is a significant advantage for organizations looking to streamline and enhance their processes.
I couldn’t agree more with your assessment. The CMMI model’s incorporation of best practices contributes to its effectiveness in guiding organizations toward better software development and maintenance.
The historical context provided for both CMM and CMMI in this article sheds light on the evolution of software development models. Understanding the origins and development of these models helps in appreciating their significance in modern software practices.
Your recognition of the historical context of CMM and CMMI is noteworthy. The evolution of these models reflects the dynamic nature of software development and the ongoing quest for more effective processes.
The differentiation between CMM and CMMI provided in this article serves as a valuable guide for organizations looking to refine their software development practices. Understanding the purposes and stages of each model aids in making informed decisions for process improvement.
Your emphasis on the value of understanding the nuanced differences between CMM and CMMI is well-stated. Informed decision-making is crucial for organizations as they navigate the complexities of refining their software practices.
You bring attention to an essential aspect—understanding the distinct purposes and stages of CMM and CMMI is vital for organizations. This understanding facilitates effective decision-making in enhancing software development processes.
The comparison of CMM and CMMI offers valuable insights into the evolution of software development models, providing organizations with a deeper understanding of the models’ distinct features. This understanding serves as a guide for implementing effective software development strategies.
Your recognition of the value of understanding the distinct features of CMM and CMMI for implementing effective software development strategies is well-stated. Organizations can benefit from informed decisions based on this understanding.
Your emphasis on the importance of understanding the distinct features of CMM and CMMI is insightful. Informed decisions based on this understanding are crucial for organizations seeking to enhance their software development practices.
The detailed comparison and explanation of CMM and CMMI models in this article provide valuable insights for organizations seeking to optimize their software development processes. The distinct characteristics of each model underscore the importance of tailored process improvement strategies.
Your acknowledgement of the importance of tailored process improvement strategies based on the characteristics of CMM and CMMI is well-observed. Organizations must carefully assess their specific needs to guide their software development practices effectively.
Your recognition of the significance of understanding the distinct characteristics of CMM and CMMI is insightful. Tailoring process improvement strategies based on specific needs is pivotal for optimizing software development practices.