The Capability Maturity Model (CMM) is a methodology to assess and improve an organization’s software development processes. It provides a framework for organizations to evaluate their current practices, identify areas for improvement and systematically enhance their software development capabilities.
What Is the Capability Maturity Model (CMM)?
The Capability Maturity Model (CMM) is a development framework created at Carnegie Mellon University to assess the maturity of an organization’s software development processes. It defines five levels of process maturity — Initial, Repeatable, Defined, Managed and Optimizing — and provides structured guidance for continuous process improvement.
The CMM was developed in 1987 by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon University, under contract with the United States Department of Defense. Its original purpose was to assess the process maturity of software contractors and improve software development outcomes related to cost, quality and delivery timelines. While it began as a tool for evaluating defense contractors, CMM was later adopted more broadly across industries as a framework for process improvement and organizational maturity assessment.
Although still referenced in historical contexts, the CMM model has largely been superseded by the more modern and flexible Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) framework.
Five Capability Maturity Model (CMM) Levels
CMM defines five levels of process maturity, each representing a stage of growth in organizational processes.
1. Initial
At this level, processes are disorganized, ad hoc and often chaotic. Success depends on individual efforts, and processes are not sufficiently defined or documented to be repeatable.
2. Repeatable
Developers establish basic project management techniques and sufficiently define and document successes in key process areas to enable replication.
3. Defined
The organization develops its own standard software development process. Processes are well-defined, documented and standardized across the organization.
4. Managed (Capable)
The organization monitors and controls its processes through data collection and analysis. Processes are measured and controlled quantitatively.
5. Optimizing (Efficient)
At this highest level, processes are continuously improved through monitoring feedback and introducing innovative practices and process enhancements. The organization is focused on continuous improvement and can respond quickly to changes and opportunities.
Capability Maturity Model Structure and KPAs
CMM is structured around key process areas (KPAs) for each maturity level, except for the Initial level. These KPAs represent clusters of related activities that, when performed collectively, achieve a set of goals important for enhancing process capability.
Each CMM KPA is organized into five sections:
- Goals
- Commitment to perform
- Ability to perform
- Activities performed
- Measurement and analysis
This structure provides a clear framework for organizations to assess their current practices and identify areas for improvement.
Benefits of the Capability Maturity Model
Implementing CMM can bring several benefits to an organization.
Improved Resource Optimization
CMM helps organizations make better use of their resources, including time, money and personnel.
Enhanced Quality Management
The framework emphasizes quality assurance and control practices.
Systematic Process Improvement
CMM provides a structured approach to evaluating and enhancing processes.
Better Project Management
As organizations move up the maturity levels, they develop more robust project management practices.
Increased Predictability
Higher maturity levels lead to more predictable project outcomes with the goal of reducing risks and improving stakeholder satisfaction.
Challenges of the Capability Maturity Model
While CMM offers numerous benefits, implementing it can present some challenges.
Time and Resource Investment
Progressing through the maturity levels requires significant time and resources, which can be challenging for smaller organizations or those with limited budgets.
Resistance to Change
Implementing CMM often requires significant changes to existing processes and practices, which may face resistance from employees accustomed to current methods.
Complexity
The model’s structure and requirements can be complex, particularly for organizations new to formal process improvement methodologies.
Maintaining Momentum
Sustaining process improvement efforts over time can be challenging, especially when facing competing priorities or organizational changes.
Balancing Flexibility and Standardization
As processes become more defined and standardized, organizations must ensure they maintain the flexibility to adapt to changing market conditions and customer needs.
Capability Maturity Model (CMM) vs. Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI)
CMMI is the successor to CMM, developed to build upon and expand the original CMM framework. CMMI combines multiple maturity models, including the Software CMM, into one integrated model.
While CMM and CMMI are related, there are some key differences.
Scope
CMM primarily focuses on software engineering processes, while CMMI expands to various disciplines, including systems engineering and hardware development.
Flexibility
CMMI offers more flexibility, allowing organizations to tailor process areas to their specific needs, whereas CMM has a more rigid structure.
Representation
CMM only offers a staged representation, while CMMI introduced both staged and continuous representations.
Adoption
CMMI is now widely adopted across industries in comparison to CMM, particularly for those requiring standardized process frameworks, such as aerospace, automotive and finance.
Essentially, CMMI builds upon the foundation laid by CMM, offering a more flexible and broadly applicable approach to process improvement and organizational maturity assessment.
Five Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Levels
CMMI, like CMM, consists of five maturity levels, but they are slightly different.
1. Initial
Processes are unpredictable, reactive and ad hoc.
2. Managed
Basic project management processes are established. Developers plan, monitor and control projects.
3. Defined
Organizational processes are well-defined and documented. All teams across the organization use standardized processes.
4. Quantitatively Managed
Developers measure and control processes using statistical and quantitative techniques.
5. Optimizing
Continuous process improvement is a key focus, based on quantitative feedback and innovative ideas.
These models offer a structured approach to process improvement and are required for many government software contracts.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Capability Maturity Model (CMM)?
The Capability Maturity Model (CMM) is a structured development framework created in 1987 to evaluate and improve the maturity of an organization’s software development processes. It outlines five levels of process maturity — Initial, Repeatable, Defined, Managed and Optimizing — that help organizations identify weaknesses, standardize practices and work toward continuous improvement.
What is the difference between CMM and CMMI?
Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is the successor to Capability Maturity Model (CMM). While CMM focuses specifically on software development processes, CMMI expands to include systems engineering, hardware development and other disciplines. CMMI also introduces two representation models — staged and continuous — and allows for more flexible tailoring of process areas. CMM is now considered outdated and has been largely replaced by CMMI across industries.
What’s the difference between capability and maturity levels in CMMI?
In CMMI, capability levels measure improvements within individual process areas, while maturity levels reflect the organization’s overall process maturity across multiple areas. Capability levels track incremental progress in specific functions; maturity levels indicate broader, organization-wide advancement.
What are the downsides of CMMI?
One drawback of CMMI is its resource and time demands, which can strain smaller organizations or those with limited budgets. Its complexity and focus on standardization may also limit flexibility or creativity if not balanced with the need to adapt to changing business conditions.
