Mapping TSP to CMMI - Carnegie Mellon University · 2005-04-01 · Mapping TSP to CMMI James McHale...

Mapping TSP to CMMI James McHale Daniel S. Wall Foreword by Watts Humphrey and Mike Konrad

April 2005

TECHNICAL REPORT CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 ESC-TR-2004-014

Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890

Mapping TSP to CMMI CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 ESC-TR-2004-014 James McHale Daniel S. Wall Foreword by Watts Humphrey and Mike Konrad

April 2005

Software Engineering Process Management

Unlimited distribution subject to the copyright.

This report was prepared for the

SEI Joint Program Office ESC/XPK 5 Eglin Street Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-2100

The ideas and findings in this report should not be construed as an official DoD position. It is published in the interest of scientific and technical information exchange.

FOR THE COMMANDER

Christos Scondras Chief of Programs, XPK

This work is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense. The Software Engineering Institute is a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense.

Copyright 2005 Carnegie Mellon University.

NO WARRANTY

THIS CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE MATERIAL IS FURNISHED ON AN "AS-IS" BASIS. CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY MAKES NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, AS TO ANY MATTER INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR PURPOSE OR MERCHANTABILITY, EXCLUSIVITY, OR RESULTS OBTAINED FROM USE OF THE MATERIAL. CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY DOES NOT MAKE ANY WARRANTY OF ANY KIND WITH RESPECT TO FREEDOM FROM PATENT, TRADEMARK, OR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.

Use of any trademarks in this report is not intended in any way to infringe on the rights of the trademark holder.

Internal use. Permission to reproduce this document and to prepare derivative works from this document for internal use is granted, provided the copyright and "No Warranty" statements are included with all reproductions and derivative works.

External use. Requests for permission to reproduce this document or prepare derivative works of this document for external and commercial use should be addressed to the SEI Licensing Agent.

This work was created in the performance of Federal Government Contract Number F19628-00-C-0003 with Carnegie Mellon University for the operation of the Software Engineering Institute, a federally funded research and development center. The Government of the United States has a royalty-free government-purpose license to use, duplicate, or disclose the work, in whole or in part and in any manner, and to have or permit others to do so, for government purposes pursuant to the copyright license under the clause at 252.227-7013.

For information about purchasing paper copies of SEI reports, please visit the publications portion of our Web site (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/pubweb.html).

http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/pubweb.html

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 i

Table of Contents

Foreword................................................................................................................vii

Acknowledgments..................................................................................................xi

Abstract.................................................................................................................xiii

1 Introduction .....................................................................................................1

2 Methodology....................................................................................................3 2.1 Assumptions Behind the Observations......................................................4

3 TSP and the CMMI Process Categories .........................................................7 3.1 Overall.......................................................................................................7

3.2 Process Management ...............................................................................8

3.3 Project Management .................................................................................8

3.4 Engineering...............................................................................................9

3.5 Support ...................................................................................................10

4 TSP and the CMMI Maturity Levels ..............................................................13 4.1 TSP and Maturity Level 2 ........................................................................13

4.2 TSP and Maturity Level 3 ........................................................................14



5 TSP Process Elements..................................................................................19 5.1 Scripts .....................................................................................................19

5.2 Forms......................................................................................................20

5.3 Roles.......................................................................................................21

5.4 Other.......................................................................................................22

5.5 Training ...................................................................................................23

6 Observations by Process Categories and PAs ...........................................25 6.1 TSP and CMMI Project Management PAs...............................................25

6.1.1 Project Planning (PP) ..................................................................26

ii CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

6.1.2 Project Monitoring and Control (PMC) ......................................... 32 6.1.3 Integrated Project Management (IPM)......................................... 37 6.1.4 Integrated Project Management (IPM SG3, SG4) – IPPD............ 42 6.1.5 Risk Management (RSKM).......................................................... 45 6.1.6 Integrated Teaming (IT) – IPPD................................................... 48 6.1.7 Quantitative Project Management (QPM) .................................... 52

6.2 TSP and Project Management Generic Practices ................................... 57

7 TSP and CMMI Process Management Process Areas ................................ 65 7.1 Scope of PROCESS ............................................................................... 65

7.1.1 Organization Process Focus (OPF)............................................. 66 7.1.2 Organization Process Definition (OPD) ....................................... 69 7.1.3 Organizational Training (OT) ....................................................... 72 7.1.4 Organizational Process Performance (OPP) ............................... 75 7.1.5 Organizational Innovation and Deployment (OID) ....................... 78

7.2 TSP and Process Management Generic Practices.................................. 81

8 TSP and CMMI Engineering PAs .................................................................. 85 8.1 Scope of Engineering Process Areas...................................................... 85

8.1.1 Requirements Management (REQM) .......................................... 86 8.1.2 Requirements Development (RD)................................................ 89 8.1.3 Technical Solution (TS) ............................................................... 94 8.1.4 Product Integration (PI) ............................................................... 98 8.1.5 Verification (VER)...................................................................... 102 8.1.6 Validation (VAL) ........................................................................ 106

8.2 TSP and Engineering Category Generic Practices................................ 109

9 TSP and CMMI Support Process Areas ......................................................117 9.1 Scope of SUPPORT ..............................................................................117

9.1.1 Configuration Management (CM) .............................................. 118 9.1.2 Process and Product Quality Assurance (PPQA) ...................... 122 9.1.3 Measurement and Analysis (MA)............................................... 126 9.1.4 Decision Analysis and Resolution (DAR)................................... 131 9.1.5 Organizational Environment for Integration – IPPD (OEI) .......... 135 9.1.6 Causal Analysis and Resolution (CAR) ..................................... 138

9.2 TSP and Support Category Generic Practices ...................................... 141

10 Summary ..................................................................................................... 147

Appendix A: Supplier Management Process Areas ........................................ 149

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 iii

Appendix B: Process Management Process Areas Using TSP as the Implementation Method ............................................................... 161

References........................................................................................................... 189

iv CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 v

List of Figures

Figure 1: Summary of TSP Project Practice Coverage by Process Category .........7

Figure 2: TSP Practice Profile by Process Management PA...................................8

Figure 3: TSP Practice Profile by Project Management PA ....................................9

Figure 4: TSP Practice Profile by Engineering PA................................................10

Figure 5: TSP Practice Profile by Support PA ...................................................... 11

Figure 6: TSP Practice Profile by Maturity Level 2 PA..........................................14

Figure 7: TSP Practices Profile by Maturity Level 3 PA ........................................15



Figure 10: TSP Practices Profile for Supplier Management Process Areas.......... 149

Figure 11: TSP Practices Profile for Process Management PAs When TSP Is Used as the Implementation Method................................................... 161

vi CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 vii

Foreword

The SEI produced this technical report for those interested in both CMMI and the TSP and in how these two technologies might be used together to accelerate their process improvement efforts. The report also clarifies some common misconceptions about how these two improvement frameworks support each other.

TSP-CMMI Synergies When adopting an SEI improvement technology, many organizations mistakenly view it as a stand-alone effort. However, software engineering is a rich and varied field and, as demonstrated by many other fields of engineering and science, there are often important synergistic benefits between seemingly unrelated technical disciplines. To encourage organizations to capitalize on these potential synergies, the SEI has a strategy for relating its improvement activities and for showing its partners and affiliates how its many programs can be used to support and enhance each other. This technical report is an early step in this strategy. It has been produced through the joint efforts of the CMMI and TSP project teams.

Mapping the TSP to CMMI This report is similar in nature to an earlier SEI technical report mapping TSP practices to the CMM [Davis 02]. At the time of the earlier report, the CMMI framework was well advanced, and the SEI had committed to extending the earlier CMM-TSP mapping to cover CMMI. This is the CMMI-TSP report.

When we originally developed the TSP, we built on the CMM model and established the personal and team practices needed to implement the key CMM process areas that were directly pertinent to development teams. As shown in the earlier technical report, this included a high percentage of the practices at all process maturity levels, with a heavy focus on maturity levels 3 and 4.

However, because the CMM had important gaps, we had to identify and define a family of practices that were not covered by the CMM. These included, for example, risk management, integrated teaming, and distributed engineering. With the improved coverage that CMMI provides in these areas, the close relationship of the TSP and CMMI should be clearer than before. This close relationship has advantages for TSP teams, but it should be particularly valuable to organizations that use the TSP to accelerate their CMMI improvement.

viii CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

The CMMI-TSP Improvement Strategy Some people have the mistaken impression that TSP should not be introduced until organizations have reached CMMI level 2 or higher. It is now clear, however, that TSP can help organizations at all maturity levels, and that the sooner TSP is introduced, the better. Adopting TSP has been shown to greatly accelerate CMM process improvement. For example, SEI studies show that the mean time required for organizations to improve from CMM level 2 to CMM level 3 is 22 months and that the mean time to improve from level 3 to level 4 is 28 months. However, a NAVAIR study showed that its AV-8B Joint Systems Support Activity moved from level 2 to level 4 in only 16 months instead of the expected 50.1 They attributed this rapid pace of improvement to the organization’s prior introduction of the TSP. While studies are currently underway, there are not yet any completed studies that document the acceleration achievable in CMMI process improvement through using the TSP. Based on the work done to date, however, the improvement benefits should be at least comparable to those of CMM acceleration with TSP.

Furthermore, the move from level 3 to level 4 has been recognized as the most difficult of all CMM-based improvement steps and it probably will be the most difficult CMMI improvement step. The principal reason for this difficulty may be that the process definitions that many organizations develop for level 3 must be reworked to include process measurement when they move to level 4. Because TSP includes the extensive use of measures, its use both accelerates the level 3 process definition work and also largely eliminates the need to rewrite these processes when moving to level 4. The move from level 3 to level 4 then needs only to address the two level 4 process areas.

The objective of this report is to help process professionals, process managers, project leaders, and organizational management to establish process improvement strategies and plans. If you are not now using TSP, this report will show you why it would be helpful to introduce it in parallel with your CMMI improvement efforts. However, if your organization is already using TSP and if you are planning a CMMI process improvement effort, this report will help you to decide on the most efficient and expeditious way to proceed. In either case, we suggest the use of TSP to guide the project-centered improvements and to concentrate the CMMI improvement effort on the organization-wide responsibilities that are not as completely covered by TSP.

The rest of this foreword assumes that you have a CMMI improvement effort in the planning stages or underway and that you are considering TSP introduction.

1 NAVAIR News Release ECL200301101, “AV-8B JSSA Team Soars to Level 4.” Naval Air

Systems Command, Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division, China Lake, CA, January 10, 2003.

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 ix

Typical Questions about TSP and CMMI People have asked many questions about the relationship between the TSP and CMMI. Some of the most common questions are the following.

I have been told that TSP should not be introduced until an organization is at level 3 or above. Is that correct?

No. As mentioned earlier, the TSP is helpful to organizations at every CMMI maturity level. Experience demonstrates significant benefits from TSP introduction before or concurrent with the move to CMMI maturity level 3.

We have a crash program underway to get to CMMI level 3 as fast as possible. Should we attempt to introduce TSP at the same time?

That depends on your objective. TSP introduction will improve organizational performance faster than anything else you do. If your objective is solely to reach a given maturity level rather than to improve performance, you may wish to defer TSP introduction. However, by concentrating exclusively on achieving a maturity level rather than focusing on performance improvement, you are likely to get disappointing results. A maturity level focus may lead to a bureaucratic process, and this generally delays real process improvement and damages a development organization's performance rather than enhancing it.

We are moving to CMMI level 2 and replacing our entire development environment. Senior management would also like to introduce TSP at the same time. Technical management is resisting. Should we push ahead with TSP anyway?

Probably not. While some level of change is normal in most organizations, there is a point beyond which change can be destructive. At that point, it is usually wise to limit the pace of change to something that people can tolerate. Remember, the organization must continue to operate productively during the change process.

We have been at CMM level 1 for 10 years and have been unable to make significant improvement progress. Would TSP help us with CMMI improvement?

It very likely would. Generally, the reason that organizations stay stuck at level 1 is that their senior management is unable or unwilling to provide adequate support or to give sufficient priority to the change activities. Since CMMI improvement generally must be implemented in parallel by most parts of an organization, large, entrenched, or highly bureaucratic groups are often extremely difficult to change. Because a TSP-based improvement effort can be focused on a relatively concentrated area, it is easier for management to provide the needed focus on process improvement. However, you still must have senior management support, or no improvement effort is likely to succeed.

Is TSP introduction always successful or does it sometimes fail?

x CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

The TSP is not magic. When TSP introduction efforts have failed, it has been for the same reasons that CMMI improvement efforts fail: the management team does not understand or agree with the need to change. At any maturity level, the most common problems are the lack of management support, changes in senior management, or business failures and cutbacks. Generally, when the senior management champions stay in place, both TSP and CMMI improvement efforts succeed.

Final Considerations It is becoming clear that by using TSP, organizations can greatly accelerate their CMMI process improvement work. However, several additional points should also be considered when deciding whether and how to combine TSP and CMMI improvement efforts.

First, through using TSP, engineers and engineering teams can see the reasons for many of the high-maturity CMMI practices, and they will be more likely to cooperate with and support a CMMI-based process improvement effort. It is much easier to get the support of engineers who have PSP training (part of TSP introduction) and TSP experience.

Second, since the objective of any software process improvement effort is to enhance organizational performance, and since this will require changes in engineering behavior, any improvement effort should be accompanied by steps that demonstrably change engineering behavior. PSP and TSP do this.

Third, a major risk for any improvement effort is that it can become bureaucratic and can impose added demands on the engineers instead of helping them. If, as suggested by this strategy, the group charged with process improvement work treats TSP teams as its customers, this risk will be greatly reduced.

Fourth, even if all of the above points were not enough, TSP can substantially improve the performance of the organization’s software groups, even in some groups that have already achieved CMMI maturity level 5 [Brady 04].2

Finally, while introducing TSP can greatly facilitate CMMI-based process improvement, this will only be true if it is properly introduced and used. For example, each TSP team should capitalize on the organization’s existing processes and should work closely with the established quality assurance, process, configuration management, systems, requirements, and test groups. For the TSP effort to succeed, all of the team members and all of the involved management must be properly trained, the TSP activities must be led and coached by an SEI-authorized TSP coach, and the coach must be available to coach and support the team immediately after the launch. Guidance on TSP training and introduction can be found in Winning with Software: An Executive Strategy [Humphrey 02].

2 Schneider, Kent. Keynote, 3rd Annual CMMI User’s Group and Technology Conference, Denver,

CO, 2003.

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 xi

Acknowledgments

We hereby acknowledge the colleagues that helped in various ways to produce this report.

Detailed reviews of the specific practice observations by Mike Konrad and Suzanne Garcia improved the report tremendously. It is no exaggeration to say that we learned a lot about both CMMI and TSP in producing this report, and much of that was due to the clear feedback and insightful questions from the experts.

Our early reviewers, Watts Humphrey and Marsha Pomeroy-Huff, were instrumental in letting us know where we were on the right track and where we had gone off course. Marsha’s detailed editorial comments deserve special mention in light of our editor’s remark that the initial draft was “wonderfully well written and grammatically correct.”

In addition to Watts and Marsha, the balance of the TSP Initiative team at the SEI provided steadfast support, encouragement, and crucial schedule relief. They are: Dan Burton, Kim Campbell, Anita Carleton, Noopur Davis, Caroline Graettinger, Julia Mullaney, Jodie Spielvogle, and Alan Willett.

Support from our chain of command never wavered during the production of this report. Jim Over, head of the TSP Initiative, and Bill Peterson, head of the SEI’s Software Engineering Process Management (SEPM) program, have been constant believers in the importance of this work, and managed to push us along steadily without making us feel unduly pressured.

We had the extreme good fortune to have Watts Humphrey and Mike Konrad lend their time and talent to produce a foreword for this report. We hope that the reader finds the balance of the report as useful as their foreword.

Our editor, Pamela Curtis, provided a calming influence on the sometimes hectic final throes of production.

Finally, to the many colleagues in the process improvement community who provided input on specific points, and to the even larger number that have been checking our progress, we thank you for your patience.

xii CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 xiii

Abstract

With the advent of CMMI® (Capability Maturity Model® Integration), development and maintenance organizations are faced with many issues regarding how their current practices, or new practices that they are considering adopting, compare to the new model. The Team Software ProcessSM (TSPSM), including the corequisite Personal Software ProcessSM (PSPSM), defines a set of project practices that has a growing body of evidence showing highly desirable process performance in terms of delivered product quality, schedule performance, and cost performance. TSP also has a history of favorable coverage with respect to the SW-CMM® (Capability Maturity Model for Software), a major precursor to CMMI, as well as several real-world implementations that have helped organizations to achieve high maturity levels in a relatively short period of time.

This report provides an essential element to facilitate the adoption of the TSP in organizations using CMMI, namely, a mapping of ideal TSP practices into the specific and generic practices of CMMI. By having such a mapping (also known as a gap analysis), those involved with process improvement and appraisal efforts can more easily determine how well the organization or a particular project is implementing the TSP, how well projects using TSP might rate with respect to CMMI, and where and how to fill any gaps in CMMI coverage. Organizations already following an improvement plan based on CMMI may also determine how TSP adoption might help them to achieve broader, deeper, or higher maturity implementations of CMMI goals and practices.

xiv CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 1

1 Introduction

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is a reference model consisting of best practice descriptions for a broad range of engineering activities. It is the successor model to the Capability Maturity Model for Software (SW-CMM), the Systems Engineering Capability Model (SECM) from the Electronics Industries Alliance, and the Integrated Product Development Capability Maturity Model (IPD-CMM) [Chrissis 03]. As a descriptive model, CMMI is well suited for appraisal efforts seeking to determine a particular organization’s capabilities within the scope of software, systems, integrated product engineering, or acquisition and for guiding the broad direction of process improvement efforts in these areas of expertise. However, it is not unusual for organizations to struggle when attempting to define operational practices that are both effective in terms of getting the work done and that adequately cover areas of the model targeted for compliance.

The Team Software ProcessSM (TSPSM) is a set of defined operational processes originally designed to implement high-maturity project-level practices of the SW-CMM. There is a growing body of evidence showing that TSP performs well in addressing key common goals of both SW-CMM and CMMI, namely, delivery of high-quality software, schedule performance, and cost performance [McAndrews 00, Davis 03]. In addition, TSP processes have been shown on paper to compare well to SW-CMM practices [Davis 02] and also have been demonstrated to be effective in helping real organizations to achieve high maturity on an accelerated basis [Hefley 02, Pracchia 04, Switzer 04]. With the advent of CMMI, the question naturally arises as to how well the TSP compares to the newer model. The purpose of this report is to answer that question, and to do so in a way that enables TSP implementation to be closely coupled with CMMI improvement efforts. The goal is that TSP implementation will enhance and enable the achievement of higher CMMI maturity levels in considerably less time than is commonly reported [SEI 04].

The tables presented in Section 6 constitute the core of the report. These tables, one for each process area (PA), list each specific practice (SP) of CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD v.1.1 [CMMI 02a, CMMI 02b], along with references to particular TSP process elements and practices. For each practice, a score is assigned, as explained in the methodology described in Section 2, along with any relevant notes. The PA tables are grouped by process category: project management, process management, engineering, and support. At the end of each process category

CMMI and CMM are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Carnegie Mellon

University. CMMI and CMM are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Carnegie Mellon

University. SM Team Software Process and TSP are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University.

2 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

grouping, an additional table is provided to summarize how the TSP maps into the generic practices (GPs) for that process category.

Sections 3 and 4 of the report provide graphical summaries of the observation scores, grouping the PAs first by process categories per the CMMI continuous representation (Section 3), and then by maturity levels per the CMMI staged representation (Section 4). The TSP process elements referenced in the mapping tables are listed and briefly described in Section 5.

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 3

2 Methodology

When determining how to score TSP practices with respect to related CMMI practices, the following guidelines were used to develop scoring values.

• Avoid the use of SCAMPI class “A” appraisal terminology. The Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPISM) “A” rules of evidence clearly are not met by a paper exercise such as this, and the authors want to be unequivocal in declaring that this mapping is not a guarantee of SCAMPI compliance when appraisal time comes. Therefore, instead of “Fully/Largely/Partially/Not Implemented,” the authors opted for the terminology detailed below. It is the proper activity of the engineering process group (EPG) and the appraisal team to make the determinations required by the SCAMPI method. Readers of the earlier TSP-CMM mapping [Davis 02] will recognize a similarity in terminology between the two reports.

• Avoid problems encountered in the earlier TSP-CMM mapping. While many of the ambiguities and overlaps between organizational and project practices that were inherent in the CMM for Software v.1.1 have been resolved in CMMI, of necessity a few still remain. The authors of this report have attempted to avoid labeling clearly good things in the TSP as “Partial,” when in fact they are mature project practices that support a desirable organizational activity. Therefore, a rating of “S” for “Supports” was formulated to describe more closely how TSP relates to the model practice, while making it clear that there is more to the practice than what the TSP implements. “Fully addresses” was changed to “Directly addresses” to avoid the problems inherent in questions of whether all of the subpractices of a particular practice have been covered. “Directly” says exactly what is meant, without implying that all subpractices are necessarily implemented.

Table 1: Scoring Terminology Used in the Maps

Score Value

Description

D Directly addresses; for TSP practices that meet the intent of the CMMI practice without any significant reservations (can be project or organizational practices)

P Partially addresses; for project-oriented practices that TSP addresses, but with some significant weakness or omission

S Supports; for organizational practices that TSP is not intended to fulfill completely, but which TSP supports by providing practices that either feed into the CMMI organization-level practice (e.g., data for a measurement repository) or that create a demand for or use the output of such a practice (e.g., tailoring

SM SCAMPI is a service mark of Carnegie Mellon University.

4 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

Score Value

Description

criteria)

N Not addressed; for project-related practices that TSP could and possibly should address but doesn’t (i.e., a “gap”)

U Unrated; for organizational practices outside the scope of the TSP (e.g., GP 2.1 Establish an organizational policy)

2.1 Assumptions Behind the Observations The following assumptions underlie the observations detailed in Sections 6 through 9 of this report.

1. The organization in question used the SEI-recommended TSP introduction strategy for training personnel and launching projects.

2. All projects in the organization are using the TSP for all phases of a “normal” development life cycle (i.e., requirements, architecture, implementation, deployment, and maintenance). Specifically excluded are things such as business planning, business case analysis, and the like.

There is no assumption of a particular maturity level or capability level in any of the observations. However, the interpretation of whether a particular practice is rightly a project-level or organization-level practice remains open, and is one of the major issues with which an EPG must deal on an ongoing basis. The resolution of this issue is also likely to change over time as the organization and its projects work with the TSP process assets and assimilate them into their own ways of doing business.

In general, a lower maturity organization will leave more practices to the projects, but months or years later, many of the same practices for a similar project in the same organization will be performed as organization-level activities by the EPG or other designated group. A higher maturity organization with, by definition, significant experience in process improvement will naturally recognize many practices as standard organizational activities, and TSP teams will treat them as such when defining their working processes.

This report defaults to the assumption that specific practices (SPs) in the project management, engineering, and support categories are project-level activities, with exceptions noted as they occur. Specific practices within the process management category default to the assumption that they are organization level, again with exceptions as noted. All SPs are treated individually, however, with one observation block per SP in the analysis.

Generic practices (GPs) are institutionalization activities, though not necessarily organization-level activities. This report treats the GPs collectively according to the process categories, with each GP having one observation block across all the of the process areas (PAs) within its category. While this approach may be of lesser value in determining how well an idealized TSP implementation rates against CMMI, the intent of the report here is to emphasize that the GPs really are institutionalization activities, that TSP provides many

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 5

hooks for true institutionalization, but that the decisions of whether, and how, to push the implementation of individual generic practices down to the team rests with the organization. Also, these decisions should probably relate across the PAs within a category. The approach used here seems to make these points adequately.

6 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 7

3 TSP and the CMMI Process Categories

3.1 Overall TSP as written covers a large footprint of specific practices across CMMI, as shown in the charts in this section and the next. The charts each show the percentage of SPs addressed, and to what extent they are addressed, with respect to different groupings of either the staged or continuous representations of the model.

TSP as typically implemented incorporates existing practices into a defined, measured process framework. The exact mix of existing practices and TSP practices is therefore different, not only for each organization that implements TSP, but also very often for each project, even within the same organization. In order for the information in this report to be useful, it should be combined with detailed knowledge of an organization’s existing practices, possibly gained through a SCAMPI appraisal or other formal method.

Figure 1 shows a summary of TSP coverage of specific practices summarized by process category. For detailed observations of each PA, see Sections 6 through 9.

TSP and CMMI Process Categories

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Proc

ess

Man

agem

ent

Proj

ect

Man

agem

ent

Engi

neer

ing

Supp

ort

Process Category

Perc

enta

ge o

f SP

s Unrated

Not Addressed

Partially Addressed

Supported

Directly Addressed

Figure 1: Summary of TSP Project Practice Coverage by Process Category

8 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

3.2 Process Management The process management PAs deal with cross-project activities related to developing, sharing, and adapting processes. Most of these activities are necessarily not specific to the work of a single development project, the domain of the TSP. However, TSP practices support nearly all of these activities, either by providing data and process assets for organizational use, by providing explicit process steps for using organizational assets, or by providing detailed implementations of a group of practices that can serve as an organizational exemplar. Depending on implementation choices made by the organization’s EPG, many of these practices could be rated as directly addressed.

Figure 2 shows the percentage of process management specific practices addressed by TSP for each PA. For detailed observations of each PA, see Section 7.

Process Management

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

OPF OPD OT OPP OID

Process Area

Perc

enta

ge o

f SP

s Unrated

Not Addressed

Partially Addressed

Supported

Directly Addressed

Figure 2: TSP Practice Profile by Process Management PA

3.3 Project Management The TSP shows remarkable coverage with respect to most of the process areas in the project management category. Much of the strength of the TSP lies in the multiple assets that it brings to bear in planning and tracking a project using data gathered and analyzed by the project team on an ongoing basis. While there is relatively weak coverage with respect to Supplier Agreement Management (SAM) and Integrated Supplier Management (ISM) specific practices, a project team using the TSP and planning to acquire significant components of its delivered product from other groups would likely include such acquisition activities in its planning and engineering processes as necessary.

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 9

Figure 3 shows the percentage of project practices addressed by TSP for each PA in the project management category. For detailed observations of each PA, see Section 6.

Project Management

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

PP PMC

SAMIP

MRS

KM IT ISM

QPM

Process Area

Perc

enta

ge o

f SP

s Unrated

Not Addressed

Partially Addressed

Supported

Directly Addressed

Figure 3: TSP Practice Profile by Project Management PA

3.4 Engineering When a TSP team plans its engineering activities, it begins at a minimum with the core of TSP development and maintenance life-cycle process assets on which to draw. More often, however, the project team has its own practices, either from prior development cycles or from organizational process assets, to adapt into the defined, measured, and managed framework learned in PSP training and instantiated during the TSP launch. While the chart below reflects strong CMMI coverage using the TSP default development processes, the process group using this report to guide a process improvement effort should take special care to discover the actual engineering processes used.

Figure 4 shows the percentage of specific practices addressed by TSP for each PA in the engineering category. For detailed observations on each PA, see Section 8.

10 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

Engineering

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

REQM RD TS PI VER VAL

Process Area

Perc

enta

ge o

f SP

s Unrated

Not Addressed

Partially Addressed

Supported

Directly Addressed

Figure 4: TSP Practice Profile by Engineering PA

3.5 Support The CMMI support categories can be applied to any process area or process category, and therefore lack the central theme that the other categories possess. There is no particular pattern, therefore, in how the TSP addresses these categories. For example, Measurement and Analysis (MA) shows strong coverage, reflecting the TSP’s fundamental alignment with such activities. On the other hand, Organizational Environment for Integration (OEI) deals with activities outside the scope of the typical TSP team, and therefore reflects weak coverage by the TSP.

Figure 5 shows the percentage of project practices addressed by TSP for each PA of the support category. For detailed observations on each PA, see Section 6.

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 11

Support

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

CM PPQA MA DAR OEI CAR

Process Area

Perc

enta

ge o

f SP

s Unrated

Not Addressed

Partially Addressed

Supported

Directly Addressed

Figure 5: TSP Practice Profile by Support PA

12 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 13

4 TSP and the CMMI Maturity Levels

4.1 TSP and Maturity Level 2 At maturity level 2, the projects in an organization have ensured that requirements are being managed; processes are planned, performed, measured, and controlled to ensure meeting project commitments; suppliers are selected and managed to meet project commitments. This means that commitments are established and reviewed with stakeholders, management has visibility into the status of work products and the delivery of services, work products are appropriately controlled, and these deliverables satisfy their specified process descriptions, standards, and procedures.

The TSP provides specific guidance for Project Planning (PP), Project Monitoring and Control (PMC), Requirements Management (REQM), Measurement and Analysis (MA), and Process and Product Quality Assurance (PPQA). While Supplier Agreement Management (SAM) is not specifically addressed by TSP, the project planning, monitoring, and measurement aspects of TSP provide support for these activities. It is not unusual for an organization using the TSP to start asking their suppliers for TSP-equivalent project planning, tracking, and quality information.

Figure 6 shows the percentage of specific practices addressed by TSP for each PA at maturity level 2. For detailed observations on each PA, see Sections 6, 8, and 9.

14 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

TSP and CMMI ML2

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

REQM PP PM

CSAM MA

PPQA CM

Process Area

Perc

enta

ge o

f SP

s Unrated

Not Addressed

Partially Addressed

Supported

Directly Addressed

Figure 6: TSP Practice Profile by Maturity Level 2 PA

4.2 TSP and Maturity Level 3 At maturity level 2, it is not unusual for each individual project within an organization to have a different set of management and technical process descriptions, procedures, and standards. As an organization moves towards maturity level 3, a critical distinction becomes evident. At maturity level 3, the standards, process descriptions, and procedures for a project are tailored from the organization’s set of standard processes to suit the needs of each project. As a result, the processes that are performed across the organization are consistent, except for the differences allowed by the tailoring guidelines.

The TSP focus is on teams, not organizations. Even if all projects in an organization are using the TSP, there is a need for additional organizational support. (Look at Organizational Process Definition (OPD) for examples of the additional support required.) The TSP provides teams with a robust set of processes and procedures that are usually tailored to meet the team’s needs with guidance from a TSP coach. These standard TSP processes can be used to support the creation of an organization’s standard set of processes, but they do not fully address all organizational process needs. TSP teams also collect and analyze product and process data, but in order to meet the intent of this PA, there is an additional need for an organizational function that collects and reviews this data and makes it available across the organization. In fact, it is not uncommon for an organization using the TSP for product development to initiate TSP process development projects to address the “organizational PAs” of maturity level 3: Organizational Process Focus (OPF), Organizational Process Definition (OPD), and Organizational Training (OT).

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 15

The TSP, along with the PSP, provides specific guidance for Requirements Development (RD), Technical Solution (TS), Product Integration (PI), Verification (VER), Validation (VAL), Risk Management (RSKM), and Integrated Teaming (IT). The TSP launch process, process and product data, and weekly team meetings support and enable Integrated Project Management (IPM), RSKM, and Decision Analysis and Resolution (DAR). While Integrated Supplier Management (ISM) is not specifically addressed by TSP, the project planning, monitoring, and measurement aspects of TSP provide support for its activities. The OPF and OPD process areas are supported by the process elements, process architecture, and process and product data from the TSP. OT is enabled and must be partially implemented by the introduction of TSP, as portions of the organizational training needs are identified, planned, and executed. The TSP launch and status reporting processes support Integrated Project Management for Integrated Product and Process Development (IPM for IPPD, often shortened to IPM-IPPD) and for Organizational Environment for Integration (OEI).

Figure 7 shows the percentage of specific practices addressed by TSP for each PA of maturity level 3. For detailed observations on each PA, see Sections 6 through 9.

TSP and CMMI ML3

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

RD TS PI VER VALOPF OPD OT

IPM

RSKM IT IS

MDAR

OEI

Process Area

Perc

enta

ge o

f SP

s Unrated

Not Addressed

Partially Addressed

Supported

Directly Addressed

Figure 7: TSP Practices Profile by Maturity Level 3 PA

4.3 TSP and Maturity Level 4 At maturity level 4, the organization and projects establish quantitative objectives for quality and process performance and then use these criteria in managing the projects. Quality and process performance are understood in statistical terms and are managed throughout the life of the processes.

Organizational Process Performance (OPP) derives quantitative objectives for quality and process performance from the organization’s business objectives. TSP launch preparation calls for the team to have available the organization’s standard processes for use by the team. A typical management goal, communicated in the launch, is to meet certain specified process performance and quality standards.

16 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

Quantitative Project Management (QPM) applies quantitative and statistical techniques to the management of process performance and product quality. Quality and process performance objectives for the project are based on those established by the organization. The TSP provides strong support for this process area: quality and process performance are planned, tracked, managed, and understood.

Figure 8 shows the percentage of specific practices addressed by TSP for each PA of maturity level 4. For detailed observations on each PA, see Sections 6 and 7.

TSP and CMMI ML4

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

OPP QPM

Process Area

Perc

enta

ge o

f SP

s Unrated

Not Addressed

Partially Addressed

Supported

Directly Addressed


4.4 TSP and Maturity Level 5 At maturity level 5, processes are continually improved through both incremental and innovative technological improvements that are based on the quantitative understanding achieved at maturity level 4. Organizational Innovation and Deployment (OID) enables the selection and deployment of improvements that can enhance the organization’s ability to meet its quality and process performance objectives. Causal Analysis and Resolution (CAR) provides a mechanism for projects to evaluate their processes and to look for improvements that can be implemented.

The TSP explicitly addresses the practices within the Causal Analysis and Resolution (CAR) PA and strongly supports the implementation of the OID practices. Postmortem meetings consolidate and begin to analyze data gathered either during a launch or following a development cycle. Specific problems and suggestions are documented by process improvement proposals (PIPs) during the postmortem or at any time in the life cycle. Future launches and relaunches then typically make relevant adjustments to the project’s defined processes. Most organizations implementing the TSP recognize the value of such feedback

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 17

from the primary users of the organizational processes and create mechanisms to incorporate the lessons learned so that other project teams may benefit.

Figure 9 shows the percentage of specific practices addressed by TSP for each PA of maturity level 5. For detailed observations on each PA, see Sections 7 and 9.

TSP and CMMI ML5

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

OID CAR

Process Areas

Perc

ent

of S

Ps UnratedNot Addressed

Partially AddressedSupportedDirectly Addressed


18 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 19

5 TSP Process Elements

The TSP is defined by a set of process elements that includes the following:

• scripts to guide specific work processes

• forms to capture specific information generated by enacting one or more scripts or otherwise required by some part of the process

• role specifications to guide individuals on a project in performing critical but often non-scripted (possibly non-scriptable) activities

• other assets such as the TSP introduction strategy, checklists, guidelines, and specifications not related to roles

• training courses and authorization activities in the TSP and PSP technologies

These assets, summarized in the table below, are referenced in the “TSP Reference” column in the mapping tables of Section 6.

5.1 Scripts

Grouping / Name Description Notes

Launch scripts

LAU Team launch: to guide teams in launching a software-intensive project

LAU1 Launch meeting 1 - launch overview and kick-off Step 1 in script LAU

LAU2 Launch meeting 2 - roles and goals Step 2 in script LAU

LAU3 Launch meeting 3 - strategy, process, support Step 3 in script LAU

LAU4 Launch meeting 4 - overall team plan Step 4 in script LAU

LAU5 Launch meeting 5 - quality plan Step 5 in script LAU

LAU6 Launch meeting 6 - detailed next-phase plans Step 6 in script LAU

LAU7 Launch meeting 7 - risk assessment Step 7 in script LAU

LAU8 Launch meeting 8 - management meeting preparation Step 8 in script LAU

LAU9 Launch meeting 9 - wrap-up management meeting Step 9 in script LAU

LAUPM Launch postmortem meeting - postmortem on the launch Step PM in script LAU

REL Team relaunch

REL1 Relaunch meeting 1 - status and management update

Development scripts

DEV Overall new development and enhancement process

MAINT Overall maintenance and enhancement process

ANA Impact analysis process

20 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014


HLD High-level design process

IMP Implementation process

IMP6 Unit test and test development process Step 6 in script IMP

INS Inspection process

PM Project postmortem process

REQ Requirements process

TEST Release test process

TEST1 Product build process Step 1 in script TEST

TEST2 Integration process Step 2 in script TEST

TEST3 System test process Step 3 in script TEST

TESTD Test defect-handling process

Other scripts

MTG General meeting process Used as the basis for most meeting scripts

STATUS Management and customer status meeting

WEEK Weekly team meeting

5.2 Forms


Launch forms Asterisked (*) items or equivalents are implemented in the TSP workbook (see Section 5.4)

GOAL * Team goals

INV Process inventory

ITL * Issue/risk tracking log

MTG Meeting report form

PIP Process improvement proposal

ROLE * Team role assignment

ROLEMX Role assignment matrix

SCHED * Schedule planning template

STRAT Strategic planning form

SUMDI * Defects injected summary

SUMDR * Defects removed summary

SUMP * Plan summary form

SUMQ * Quality summary form

SUMS * Program size summary

SUMT * Development time summary form

SUMTASK * Task plan summary

TASK * Task planning template

Development forms

DEFECT Defect reporting form

INS Inspection report

TESTLOG Test log

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 21


Other forms

LOGD * Defect recording log

LOGT * Time recording log

WEEK * Weekly status report Modified versions of form WEEK are used in each launch meeting.

5.3 Roles


Role manager specifications

The default set of roles to be assumed by members of the team: customer interface manager, design manager, implementation manager, test manager, planning manager, process manager, quality manager, and support manager

Customer interface manager

Customer interface manager responsibilities: customer focus, define requirements, manage requirement changes, establish and manage requirement standards, and reporting

A “line” role manager

Design manager Design manager responsibilities: lead the design, manage design changes, establish and manage design standards, and reporting


Implementation manager

Implementation responsibilities: lead the implementation, manage implementation changes, establish and manage the implementation standards, and reporting


Test manager Test manager responsibilities: test planning, test support, test analysis, and reporting


Planning manager Planning manager responsibilities: lead team planning, track team progress, and reporting

A “staff” role manager

Process manager Process manager responsibilities: process support, tracking, analysis, process problems and process improvement proposal handling and reporting


Quality manager Quality manager responsibilities: quality support, quality tracking, quality analysis, and reporting


Support manager Support manager responsibilities: tool support, configuration management, change control, reuse, and reporting


Other role specifications

Meeting roles Meeting role descriptions: chairperson, recorder, facilitator/timekeeper, attendees

Inspection roles TSP inspection process roles and responsibilities: moderator, producer, recorder, timekeeper, reviewers

Team leader TSP team leader responsibilities: leadership, people management, team coaching, quality management, project management, team responsibilities

Team member TSP team member roles and responsibilities: personal discipline, personal management, and team responsibilities

22 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

5.4 Other


Preparation checklists

PREPL Preparation for launch

PREPR Preparation for relaunch

Launch guidance

Launch coach Launch guidelines for the TSP coach

Marketing Launch guidelines for marketing management presentation

Other attendees (2) Launch guidelines for TSP coach

Senior Management Launch guidelines for senior management presentation

Team leader (2)

Launch guidelines for team leader

Team members (2) Launch guidelines for team members

Other pre-launch assets

Initial contact letter TSP launch preparation

Preparation package cover letter

TSP launch preparation material

Preparation package instructions

TSP launch preparation material

Default guidelines

Planning guidelines SEI-provided benchmark planning metrics

Quality guidelines SEI-provided benchmark quality metrics

Executive assets

Plan assessment checklist Team plan review questions; a quick start for an executive reviewing a TSP team’s plan

Quarterly review checklist

Project review questions; a quick start for senior managers to probe the status of a TSP project

TSP introduction strategy

A generic procedure and timeline for TSP implementation in an organization

These assets can be found in Winning with Software [Humphrey 02].

Other specifications and assets

NOTEBOOK Storage for project artifacts

STATUS Management status report

SUMMARY Project analysis report

TSP workbook (individual and consolidated)

Automated individual and team (consolidated) plans and actuals for size, effort, defects, and schedule; functionally equivalent versions of asterisked (*) items above under Forms are included in the TSP Workbook

Excel-based; provided by the SEI as part of the licensed TSP product suite

Checkpoint Review A review of the project to date conducted by the TSP coach or other process expert

Weekly Meeting Minutes

Minutes from weekly team meetings

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 23

5.5 Training


Training and authorization

SEI training records SEI-maintained records of everyone reported by SEI-authorized instructors to have finished any of the training classes listed below

Introduction to Personal Process

Training for team members who are not software engineers (2 days)

PSP for Engineers Training for software developers (10 days)

TSP Executive Seminar Executive briefing on PSP and TSP, including benefits and the TSP introduction strategy (1 day)

Managing TSP Teams Training for people managing TSP teams (3 days)

PSP Instructor Training Training to become a PSP instructor (5 days) Offered only through the SEI; prerequisite is successful completion of PSP for Engineers

TSP Launch Coach Training

Training to become a TSP coach (5 days) Offered only through the SEI; prerequisite is successful completion of PSP Instructor Training

TSP coach observation Observation and mentoring of TSP coach during their first TSP launch (4 or 5 days)

Offered only through the SEI; successful completion necessary for SEI authorization

24 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 25

6 Observations by Process Categories and PAs

6.1 TSP and CMMI Project Management PAs The Project Management process areas cover the project management activities related to planning, monitoring, and controlling the project. The page numbers for each process area as listed below are from CMMI: Guidelines for Process Improvement and Product Improvement [Chrissis 03].

The Project Management category contains the following process areas.

Project Planning pages 405-428 Project Monitoring and Control pages 391-404 Integrated Project Management for IPPD pages 187-216 Risk Management pages 497-516 Integrated Teaming pages 231-246 Quantitative Project Management pages 441-464

26

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

6.1.

1 P

roje

ct P

lan

nin

g (

PP

)

The

Pro

ject

Pla

nnin

g (P

P) p

roce

ss a

rea

incl

udes

dev

elop

ing

the

proj

ect p

lan,

invo

lvin

g st

akeh

olde

rs a

ppro

pria

tely

, obt

aini

ng c

omm

itm

ent t

o th

e pl

an, a

nd m

aint

aini

ng th

e pl

an. W

hen

usin

g an

IPP

D a

ppro

ach,

sta

keho

lder

s re

pres

ent n

ot ju

st th

e te

chni

cal e

xper

tise

for

pro

duct

and

pro

cess

de

velo

pmen

t, bu

t als

o th

e bu

sine

ss im

plic

atio

ns o

f th

e pr

oduc

t and

pro

cess

dev

elop

men

t. Pl

anni

ng b

egin

s w

ith r

equi

rem

ents

that

def

ine

the

prod

uct

and

proj

ect.

The

pro

ject

pla

n co

vers

the

vari

ous

proj

ect m

anag

emen

t and

eng

inee

ring

act

iviti

es th

at w

ill b

e pe

rfor

med

by

the

proj

ect.

The

pro

ject

w

ill r

evie

w o

ther

pla

ns th

at a

ffec

t the

pro

ject

fro

m v

ario

us r

elev

ant s

take

hold

ers

and

esta

blis

h co

mm

itm

ents

wit

h th

ose

rele

vant

sta

keho

lder

s fo

r th

eir

cont

ribu

tions

to th

e pr

ojec

t.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Est

imat

es o

f th

e pr

ojec

t pl

anni

ng

para

met

ers

are

esta

blis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3

For

ms:

ST

RA

T,

SU

MS

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

top-

leve

l wor

k br

eakd

own

stru

ctur

e (W

BS

) to

est

imat

e th

e sc

ope

of th

e

proj

ect.

Rol

es: D

esig

n

man

ager

The

des

ign

man

ager

lead

s th

e te

am in

iden

tify

ing

the

prin

cipa

l pro

duct

s an

d co

mpo

nent

s of

the

proj

ect i

n L

AU

3 an

d re

cord

s th

ese

on f

orm

s

ST

RA

T a

nd S

UM

S.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6

For

ms:

ST

RA

T,

SU

MQ

, SU

MS

1.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

esti

mat

es o

f th

e

attr

ibut

es o

f th

e w

ork

prod

ucts

and

task

s.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing,

desi

gn m

anag

ers

Pre

lim

inar

y es

tim

ates

are

gen

erat

ed in

LA

U3

and

refi

ned

as n

eede

d in

LA

U4

and

LA

U6.

For

m

ST

RA

T is

use

d fo

r de

velo

ping

the

esti

mat

es in

cont

ext;

form

SU

MS

reco

rds

resu

lts. I

n L

AU

5,

qual

ity

attr

ibut

es (

defe

ct d

ensi

ties

and

pha

se y

ield

s)

are

esti

mat

ed a

nd r

ecor

ded

on f

orm

SU

MQ

.

Dif

fere

nt s

teps

are

led

by th

e te

am le

ader

, des

ign

man

ager

, or

plan

ning

man

ager

.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

27

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6

For

ms:

ST

RA

T,

TA

SK

1.3.

Def

ine

the

proj

ect l

ife-

cycl

e ph

ases

on

whi

ch to

sco

pe th

e pl

anni

ng e

ffor

t.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss

man

ager

The

team

lead

er le

ads

the

team

in d

efin

ing

the

proj

ect d

evel

opm

ent s

trat

egy.

The

pro

cess

man

ager

lead

s th

e de

fini

tion

of th

e ov

eral

l dev

elop

men

t

proc

ess

up to

del

iver

y; r

esul

ts a

re r

ecor

ded

on f

orm

ST

RA

T a

nd r

efle

cted

in T

AS

K p

lans

gen

erat

ed in

LA

U4

and

refi

ned

in L

AU

6.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6

For

ms:

ST

RA

T,

TA

SK

, TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

1.4.

Est

imat

e th

e pr

ojec

t eff

ort a

nd c

ost f

or

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts a

nd ta

sks

base

d on

esti

mat

ion

rati

onal

e.

Rol

es: P

lann

ing,

desi

gn

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

ber

Pre

lim

inar

y es

tim

ates

are

mad

e in

LA

U3

and

refi

ned

as n

eede

d an

d to

the

nece

ssar

y le

vel o

f

deta

il in

LA

U4

and

LA

U6.

For

ms

ST

RA

T a

nd

TA

SK

rec

ord

resu

lts.

The

des

ign

or p

lann

ing

man

ager

lead

s th

e w

ay in

LA

U3

and

LA

U4.

Indi

vidu

al te

am m

embe

rs m

ake

adju

stm

ents

bas

ed

on p

erso

nal h

isto

rica

l dat

a if

ava

ilab

le, o

ther

wis

e

on p

erso

nal e

stim

ated

pro

duct

ivity

.

D

Dol

lar-

base

d co

st e

stim

ates

are

not

exp

lici

tly

call

ed f

or; h

owev

er, i

n pr

acti

ce, t

eam

s

gene

rate

thes

e if

req

uire

d by

the

orga

niza

tion

.

SG2.

A p

roje

ct p

lan

is e

stab

lishe

d an

d

mai

ntai

ned

as t

he b

asis

for

man

agin

g th

e

proj

ect.

28

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U4,

LA

U6

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

SC

HE

DU

LE

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

proj

ect’

s

budg

et a

nd s

ched

ule.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

man

ager

, tea

m

mem

ber

Scr

ipt L

AU

4 de

velo

ps a

n ov

eral

l sch

edul

e, w

hile

scri

pt L

AU

6 de

velo

ps d

etai

led

indi

vidu

al s

ched

ules

for

the

enti

re te

am. T

hese

are

cap

ture

d fi

rst o

n th

e

team

’s o

vera

ll T

AS

K a

nd S

CH

ED

for

ms

(LA

U4)

and

then

on

each

indi

vidu

al’s

TA

SK

and

SC

HE

D

form

(L

AU

6), a

nd th

e in

divi

dual

pla

ns a

re r

olle

d up

in th

e T

SP

con

soli

date

d w

orkb

ook

(LA

U6)

. The

team

lead

er o

r pl

anni

ng m

anag

er le

ads

the

disc

ussi

ons.

D

A b

udge

t is

not s

peci

fica

lly

addr

esse

d in

mon

etar

y te

rms;

exp

endi

ture

s ar

e ge

nera

lly

expr

esse

d in

term

s of

per

son-

hour

s on

task

. In

prac

tice

, tea

ms

gene

rate

a m

onet

ary

budg

et if

man

agem

ent a

sks

for

it.

Scri

pts:

LA

U7

For

ms:

IT

L,

team

and

indi

vidu

al T

SP

wor

kboo

ks

2.2.

Ide

ntif

y an

d an

alyz

e pr

ojec

t ris

ks.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er

Scr

ipt L

AU

7 gu

ides

the

team

exp

lici

tly

thro

ugh

iden

tify

ing

and

mak

ing

a pr

elim

inar

y an

alys

is o

f

proj

ect r

isks

, cap

turi

ng th

em o

n th

e is

sue

trac

king

log

(IT

L),

and

fil

ing

sam

e in

the

proj

ect

NO

TE

BO

OK

. The

team

lead

er le

ads

the

disc

ussi

on.

D

Rol

es: P

lann

ing,

supp

ort

man

ager

s

2.3.

Pla

n fo

r th

e m

anag

emen

t of

proj

ect

data

.

Oth

er:

SU

MM

AR

Y

NO

TE

BO

OK

The

pla

nnin

g m

anag

er is

res

pons

ible

for

mai

ntai

ning

the

proj

ect N

OT

EB

OO

K th

at h

olds

both

laun

ch a

nd o

ngoi

ng p

roje

ct p

roce

ss d

ata.

The

SU

MM

AR

Y s

peci

fica

tion

det

ails

a p

erio

dic

or

even

t-dr

iven

rol

lup

of p

roje

ct d

ata.

P/S

D

etai

ls o

f ho

w d

ata

man

agem

ent i

s

acco

mpl

ishe

d ar

e no

t spe

cifi

ed b

y th

e T

SP. I

f

ther

e is

no

orga

niza

tion

al s

tand

ard

in p

lace

,

the

plan

ning

or

supp

ort m

anag

er u

sual

ly s

ets

up a

com

pute

r-ac

cess

ible

ver

sion

of

the

proj

ect N

OT

EB

OO

K a

nd k

eeps

wee

kly

snap

shot

s of

sam

e.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

29

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, L

AU

(esp

. LA

U4,

LA

U6,

LA

U8,

LA

U9)

, RE

L

For

ms:

TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

2.4.

Pla

n fo

r ne

cess

ary

reso

urce

s to

per

form

the

proj

ect.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Iden

tifi

cati

on o

f th

e te

am le

ader

and

pro

ject

team

prio

r to

the

laun

ch r

epre

sent

s m

anag

emen

t’s

init

ial

thou

ghts

on

the

nece

ssar

y re

sour

ces.

The

laun

ch

itse

lf is

the

vehi

cle

for

the

team

to d

eter

min

e th

e

nece

ssar

y re

sour

ces,

dev

elop

alt

erna

tive

pla

ns if

nece

ssar

y, a

nd o

btai

n m

anag

emen

t com

mit

men

t to

a pa

rtic

ular

pla

n w

ith

part

icul

ar r

esou

rces

.

D

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L, P

RE

PR

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

LA

U7

For

ms:

Tea

m

and

indi

vidu

al

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.5.

Pla

n fo

r kn

owle

dge

and

skil

ls n

eede

d to

perf

orm

the

proj

ect.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Man

agem

ent i

s re

spon

sibl

e fo

r as

sign

ing

a

com

pete

nt te

am le

ader

and

ade

quat

e st

aff

to a

proj

ect.

The

team

lead

er h

as a

spe

cifi

c

resp

onsi

bili

ty to

ens

ure

that

indi

vidu

als

on th

e te

am

have

the

requ

ired

kno

wle

dge

and

skil

ls to

per

form

thei

r as

sign

ed ta

sks.

Ind

ivid

ual t

eam

mem

bers

are

resp

onsi

ble

for

arra

ngin

g fo

r th

e ed

ucat

ion

and

trai

ning

nec

essa

ry to

do

supe

rior

wor

k.

D

30

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

LA

U1,

LA

U9,

RE

L, S

TA

TU

S

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.6.

Pla

n th

e in

volv

emen

t of

iden

tifi

ed

stak

ehol

ders

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m le

ader

,

role

man

ager

s

Man

agem

ent i

s ex

plic

itly

invo

lved

, beg

inni

ng w

ith

the

laun

ch a

nd c

onti

nuin

g w

ith

regu

lar

ST

AT

US

repo

rts,

incl

udin

g th

e re

sult

s of

rel

aunc

hes.

The

team

lead

er a

nd r

ole

man

ager

s ar

e re

spon

sibl

e fo

r

invo

lvin

g ot

her

stak

ehol

ders

as

nece

ssar

y an

d

appr

opri

ate.

P

The

re is

no

expl

icit

gui

danc

e in

the

laun

ch to

plan

for

sta

keho

lder

invo

lvem

ent,

nor

is th

ere

a de

sign

ated

pla

ce to

rec

ord

such

info

rmat

ion.

How

ever

, in

prac

tice

, ens

urin

g th

e

invo

lvem

ent o

f re

leva

nt p

arti

es is

a s

tren

gth

of

TS

P te

ams.

Lau

nche

s an

d re

laun

ches

are

a

com

mon

poi

nt o

f in

volv

emen

t for

rel

evan

t

stak

ehol

ders

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

RE

L

For

ms:

WE

EK

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

man

ager

2.7.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

over

all

proj

ect p

lan

cont

ent.

Oth

er:

NO

TE

BO

OK

The

ent

ire

laun

ch s

eque

nce

and

subs

eque

nt

rela

unch

es c

reat

e, u

pdat

e, a

nd e

xten

d pr

ojec

t pla

n

artif

acts

for

incl

usio

n in

the

proj

ect N

OT

EB

OO

K.

The

pla

n is

oft

en r

evis

ed d

urin

g ex

ecut

ion,

bot

h at

the

indi

vidu

al a

nd te

am le

vels

. For

exa

mpl

e, th

e

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

s (s

crip

t and

for

m W

EE

K)

resu

lt in

fre

quen

t pla

n ad

just

men

ts in

res

pons

e to

the

team

’s p

rogr

ess

and

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

wor

k.

D

See

Not

es a

bove

for

SP

2.3

.

SG3.

Com

mit

men

ts t

o th

e pl

an a

re

esta

blis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

Scri

pts:

LA

U6,

LA

U7,

LA

U8,

LA

U9

3.1.

Rev

iew

all

pla

ns th

at a

ffec

t the

pro

ject

to u

nder

stan

d pr

ojec

t com

mit

men

ts.

For

ms:

SU

MQ

,

SU

MP

, SU

MS

,

TA

SK

, SC

HE

D

The

qua

lity

pla

n is

rev

iew

ed in

LA

U6

afte

r

indi

vidu

al p

lans

hav

e be

en c

reat

ed a

nd

cons

olid

ated

into

a te

am p

lan.

The

team

rev

iew

s it

s

plan

aga

inst

the

team

’s a

nd m

anag

emen

t’s

desi

red

goal

s in

LA

U6

and

LA

U8

and

crea

tes

alte

rnat

ive

plan

s if

nec

essa

ry. D

urin

g L

AU

9, th

e te

am p

rese

nts

D

If th

ere

are

any

anci

llar

y pl

ans

that

aff

ect t

he

team

’s p

lan,

suc

h as

fac

ilit

ies

issu

es o

r a

supp

ort g

roup

, the

team

wil

l eit

her

secu

re

nece

ssar

y co

mm

itm

ents

bef

ore

they

pre

sent

to

man

agem

ent o

r m

ake

the

case

for

thei

r ne

eds

duri

ng L

AU

3.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

31

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

the

plan

and

any

alt

erna

tive

s an

d as

ks f

or

man

agem

ent’

s ap

prov

al o

f a

spec

ific

pla

n.

Man

agem

ent r

evie

ws

the

plan

acc

ordi

ng to

the

plan

asse

ssm

ent c

heck

list

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

LA

U7,

LA

U8,

LA

U9

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

SC

HE

D

3.2.

Rec

onci

le th

e pr

ojec

t pla

n to

ref

lect

avai

labl

e an

d es

tim

ated

res

ourc

es.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

The

TS

P te

am c

ompa

res

and

adju

sts

its

plan

s

freq

uent

ly a

gain

st e

xist

ing

and

pote

ntia

l res

ourc

es

duri

ng th

e la

unch

(L

AU

4, L

AU

6, L

AU

7, a

nd

LA

U8)

. Thi

s in

clud

es p

repa

rati

on o

f al

tern

ativ

e

plan

s, w

here

app

ropr

iate

, tha

t mak

e di

ffer

ent

assu

mpt

ions

abo

ut a

vail

able

res

ourc

es, c

riti

cal

mil

esto

ne d

ates

, and

del

iver

ed f

unct

iona

lity

. In

LA

U9,

man

agem

ent c

hoos

es a

pla

n ba

sed,

am

ong

othe

r co

nsid

erat

ions

, on

reso

urce

ava

ilab

ilit

y.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U, R

EL

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.3.

Obt

ain

com

mit

men

t fro

m r

elev

ant

stak

ehol

ders

res

pons

ible

for

per

form

ing

and

supp

ortin

g pl

an e

xecu

tion

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m le

ader

,

role

man

ager

s

The

ent

ire

laun

ch p

roce

ss e

lici

ts c

omm

itm

ent b

y

the

proj

ect t

eam

for

the

team

’s p

lan

(bui

lt in

LA

U2

to L

AU

8) to

mee

t man

agem

ent’

s pr

esen

ted

goal

s

and

by m

anag

emen

t to

one

of th

e pl

an a

lter

nati

ves

pres

ente

d by

the

team

(L

AU

9). R

elau

nche

s re

visi

t

all c

omm

itm

ents

for

fea

sibi

lity

, pot

enti

al a

lter

nate

appr

oach

es, a

nd, i

f ne

cess

ary,

ren

egot

iati

on w

ith

man

agem

ent.

P

TS

P p

roje

cts

freq

uent

ly in

vite

sig

nifi

cant

stak

ehol

ders

to p

arti

cipa

te in

laun

ches

and

typi

call

y ch

eck

wit

h ex

tern

al g

roup

s as

nece

ssar

y du

ring

the

plan

ning

pro

cess

;

how

ever

, get

ting

com

mit

men

ts f

rom

oth

er

“rel

evan

t sta

keho

lder

s” is

not

exp

lici

tly

call

ed

for.

For

TSP

mul

ti-t

eam

s, th

e co

mpo

nent

team

s of

a la

rger

pro

ject

exp

lici

tly n

egot

iate

com

mit

men

ts to

sup

port

eac

h ot

her.

32

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

6.1.

2 P

roje

ct M

on

ito

rin

g a

nd

Co

ntr

ol (

PM

C)

The

Pro

ject

Mon

itori

ng a

nd C

ontr

ol (

PMC

) pr

oces

s ar

ea in

clud

es m

onit

orin

g ac

tivi

ties

and

taki

ng c

orre

ctiv

e ac

tions

. The

pro

ject

pla

n sp

ecif

ies

the

appr

opri

ate

leve

l of

proj

ect m

onit

orin

g, th

e fr

eque

ncy

of p

rogr

ess

revi

ews,

and

the

mea

sure

s us

ed to

mon

itor

pro

gres

s. P

rogr

ess

is p

rim

arily

de

term

ined

by

com

pari

ng p

rogr

ess

to th

e pl

an. W

hen

actu

al s

tatu

s de

viat

es s

igni

fica

ntly

fro

m e

xpec

ted

valu

es, c

orre

ctiv

e ac

tions

are

take

n as

ap

prop

riat

e. T

hese

act

ions

may

incl

ude

repl

anni

ng.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Act

ual p

erfo

rman

ce a

nd p

rogr

ess

of t

he p

roje

ct a

re m

onit

ored

aga

inst

the

proj

ect

plan

.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

PM

, RE

L1,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

1.1.

Mon

itor

the

actu

al v

alue

s of

the

proj

ect

plan

ning

par

amet

ers

agai

nst t

he p

roje

ct

plan

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

man

ager

, oth

er

role

man

ager

s

TS

P te

ams

typi

call

y ex

amin

e ac

tual

val

ues

duri

ng th

e w

eekl

y st

atus

mee

ting

, pos

tmor

tem

s,

and

mee

ting

1 o

f re

laun

ches

. The

team

lead

er o

r

plan

ning

man

ager

lead

s th

e te

am in

com

pari

ng

thes

e da

ta to

est

imat

es (

for

prod

ucti

vity

and

tim

e

on ta

sk)

and

the

actu

al w

ork

prod

ucts

(fo

r si

ze

and

defe

ct d

ensi

ty).

Oth

er r

ole

man

ager

s w

eigh

in a

s ap

prop

riat

e.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

33

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

GO

AL

,

WE

EK

, PM

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

1.2.

Mon

itor

com

mit

men

ts a

gain

st th

ose

mad

e in

the

proj

ect p

lan.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

Tea

m m

embe

rs, u

sual

ly in

ass

ocia

tion

wit

h th

eir

desi

gnat

ed r

ole

man

ager

res

pons

ibil

itie

s an

d as

capt

ured

on

form

GO

AL

, mon

itor

the

team

’s

stat

us w

ith

resp

ect t

o it

s go

als

and

com

mit

men

ts

wee

kly

(WE

EK

).

D

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

IR

TL

1.3.

Mon

itor

risk

s ag

ains

t tho

se id

enti

fied

in

the

proj

ect p

lan.

Rol

es: R

ole

man

ager

s

Tea

m m

embe

rs, u

sual

ly in

con

junc

tion

wit

h on

e

or m

ore

role

ass

ignm

ents

as

capt

ured

on

form

IRT

L, m

onit

or th

e st

atus

of

iden

tifie

d pl

an r

isks

wee

kly

and

repo

rt to

the

team

wee

kly

and

man

agem

ent r

egul

arly

.

D

The

team

ass

igns

ris

k m

onito

ring

resp

onsi

bili

ties

in L

AU

7.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

Tea

m a

nd

indi

vidu

al T

SP

wor

kboo

ks

1.4.

Mon

itor

the

man

agem

ent o

f pr

ojec

t

data

aga

inst

the

proj

ect p

lan.

Rol

es: P

lann

ing

man

ager

The

pla

nnin

g m

anag

er is

res

pons

ible

for

ensu

ring

that

indi

vidu

al p

rogr

am p

lans

are

upda

ted

wee

kly

and

revi

sed

as n

eede

d an

d fo

r

cons

olid

atin

g th

ese

data

wee

kly

into

a te

am

view

.

P/S

D

etai

ls o

f ho

w d

ata

is m

anag

ed o

n an

ongo

ing

basi

s ar

e no

t spe

cifi

ed b

y th

e T

SP;

how

ever

, thi

s is

cle

arly

a p

lann

ing

man

ager

resp

onsi

bili

ty.

34

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

PM

,

ST

AT

US

1.5.

Mon

itor

stak

ehol

der

invo

lvem

ent

agai

nst t

he p

roje

ct p

lan.

Rol

es: A

ll r

ole

desc

ript

ions

,

esp.

team

lead

er

In a

ddit

ion

to th

e la

unch

, the

team

obt

ains

stak

ehol

der

eval

uati

ons

duri

ng th

e po

stm

orte

m.

The

team

lead

er r

egul

arly

pro

vide

s st

atus

to

man

agem

ent a

nd o

ther

des

igna

ted

stak

ehol

ders

.

Rol

e m

anag

ers

invo

lve

rele

vant

sta

keho

lder

s

duri

ng e

xecu

tion

of

the

plan

, as

requ

ired

.

P

As

in P

P S

P 2

.6 a

nd 3

.3, o

ppor

tuni

ties

for

stak

ehol

der

invo

lvem

ent a

re o

bvio

us a

nd

impl

icit

ly e

ncou

rage

d, b

ut n

ot e

xpli

citl

y

call

ed f

or o

utsi

de o

f th

e P

M a

ctiv

ity.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

,

SU

MM

AR

Y

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

man

ager

, tea

m

mem

ber

1.6.

Per

iodi

call

y re

view

the

proj

ect’

s

prog

ress

, per

form

ance

, and

issu

es.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

The

team

rev

iew

s it

s st

atus

wee

kly.

The

team

lead

er r

epor

ts te

am d

ata

and

issu

es r

egul

arly

,

usua

lly

wee

kly,

to m

anag

emen

t. M

anag

emen

t

hold

s qu

arte

rly

revi

ews

of p

roje

ct s

tatu

s.

D

Scri

pts:

PM

,

RE

L1

For

ms:

ST

AT

US

1.7.

Rev

iew

the

acco

mpl

ishm

ents

and

resu

lts

of th

e pr

ojec

t at s

elec

ted

proj

ect

mile

ston

es.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

The

team

lead

er r

evie

ws

curr

ent s

tatu

s w

ith

the

team

dur

ing

RE

L1

and

wit

h m

anag

emen

t as

requ

este

d. T

he te

am le

ader

and

sev

eral

of

the

role

man

ager

s le

ad a

thor

ough

rev

iew

of

the

team

’s p

erfo

rman

ce, p

roce

sses

, and

oth

er

impo

rtan

t asp

ects

of

the

proj

ect d

urin

g

post

mor

tem

s fo

r ea

ch la

unch

cyc

le a

nd a

t the

end

of th

e pr

ojec

t.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

35

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG2.

Cor

rect

ive

acti

ons

are

man

aged

to

clos

ure

whe

n th

e pr

ojec

t’s

perf

orm

ance

or r

esul

ts d

evia

te s

igni

fica

ntly

fro

m t

he

plan

.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

asso

ciat

ed

wee

kly

mee

ting

min

utes

, IR

TL

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.1.

Col

lect

and

ana

lyze

the

issu

es a

nd

dete

rmin

e th

e co

rrec

tive

act

ions

to a

ddre

ss

the

issu

es.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

ber

Sig

nifi

cant

dev

iati

ons

from

the

plan

, cha

nges

in

the

stat

us o

f id

enti

fied

ris

ks, a

nd a

ny o

ther

rele

vant

issu

es a

re f

lagg

ed d

urin

g w

eekl

y st

atus

mee

ting

s. T

he e

ffec

t on

the

achi

evem

ent o

f te

am

goal

s is

of

para

mou

nt c

once

rn. T

eam

con

sens

us

is ty

pica

lly

soug

ht f

or c

orre

ctiv

e ac

tion

s w

here

the

solu

tion

is n

ot o

bvio

us f

rom

the

data

.

D

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

2.

2. T

ake

corr

ecti

ve a

ctio

n on

iden

tifi

ed

issu

es.

For

ms:

WE

EK

and

wee

kly

mee

ting

min

utes

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

The

team

lead

er, a

des

igna

ted

role

man

ager

, or

othe

r te

am m

embe

rs ta

ke c

orre

ctiv

e ac

tion

s as

nece

ssar

y, u

sual

ly a

s a

resu

lt o

f de

cisi

ons

mad

e

at th

e w

eekl

y m

eeti

ng (

WE

EK

) an

d re

cord

ed a

s

acti

on it

ems

in th

e m

inut

es.

D

36

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

ber

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

mee

ting

min

utes

For

ms:

IR

TL

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

2.3.

Man

age

corr

ecti

ve a

ctio

ns to

clo

sure

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

ber

The

team

, led

by

the

team

lead

er o

r th

e

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

, mon

itor

s on

at l

east

a

wee

kly

basi

s ho

w e

ffec

tive

its

corr

ecti

ve a

ctio

ns

are

and

whe

ther

or

not t

hey

need

to b

e ad

just

ed.

Dec

isio

ns a

re r

ecor

ded

eith

er in

mee

ting

min

utes

or o

n th

e IR

TL

.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

37

6.1.

3 In

teg

rate

d P

roje

ct M

anag

emen

t (I

PM

)

The

Int

egra

ted

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

t (IP

M)

proc

ess

area

est

abli

shes

and

mai

ntai

ns th

e pr

ojec

t’s

defi

ned

proc

ess

that

is ta

ilore

d fr

om th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

set

of

stan

dard

pro

cess

es. T

he p

roje

ct is

man

aged

usi

ng th

e pr

ojec

t’s d

efin

ed p

roce

ss. T

he p

roje

ct u

ses

and

cont

ribu

tes

to th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

pro

cess

ass

ets.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

The

pro

ject

is c

ondu

cted

usi

ng a

defi

ned

proc

ess

that

is t

ailo

red

from

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

PM

For

ms:

IN

V,

TA

SK

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

proj

ect’

s

defi

ned

proc

ess.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss

man

ager

The

team

def

ines

its

wor

king

pro

cess

es d

urin

g

LA

U3,

and

for

mal

ly e

valu

ates

pro

cess

effe

ctiv

enes

s du

ring

the

post

mor

tem

. Any

proc

esse

s to

be

crea

ted,

ada

pted

, or

docu

men

ted

for

the

team

’s w

ork

are

capt

ured

on

form

IN

V.

Tas

ks th

at r

efle

ct th

ese

proc

esse

s ar

e in

clud

ed in

one

or m

ore

team

mem

ber’

s T

AS

K p

lans

. The

team

lead

er a

nd p

roce

ss m

anag

er e

nsur

e th

at th

e

plan

s re

flec

t the

team

’s d

efin

ed p

roce

sses

and

that

the

plan

s an

d pr

oces

ses

are

adju

sted

as

nece

ssar

y to

ref

lect

how

the

wor

k is

act

uall

y

bein

g do

ne.

D

38

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6

For

ms:

SU

MS,

SU

MP

, TA

SK

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

1.2.

Use

the

orga

niza

tiona

l pro

cess

ass

ets

and

mea

sure

men

t rep

osito

ry f

or e

stim

atin

g

and

plan

ning

the

proj

ect’

s ac

tivi

ties

.

Oth

er: L

aunc

h

prep

arat

ion

guid

elin

es,

plan

ning

and

qual

ity

guid

elin

es

The

TS

P u

ses

its

own

defi

ned

proc

esse

s an

d

guid

elin

es f

or p

lann

ing

and

qual

ity in

des

igna

ted

plac

es in

LA

U3

thro

ugh

LA

U6.

The

pre

para

tion

guid

elin

es f

or b

oth

the

team

lead

er a

nd te

am

mem

bers

cal

ls f

or th

em to

“br

ing

any

rele

vant

proc

ess

defi

niti

on m

ater

ials

you

thin

k yo

u w

ill

need

for

this

pro

ject

,” a

nd to

“ag

ree

on w

hich

team

mem

ber

wil

l bri

ng a

cop

y of

the

orga

niza

tion

’s d

efin

ed p

roce

ss if

ther

e is

one

,

any

rele

vant

eng

inee

ring

sta

ndar

ds, a

nd th

e

conf

igur

atio

n an

d ch

ange

con

trol

man

agem

ent

proc

esse

s.”

Rel

evan

t org

aniz

atio

nal d

ata,

if

avai

labl

e, a

re u

sed

inst

ead

of th

e pl

anni

ng a

nd

qual

ity

guid

elin

es in

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

and

LA

U6.

D/S

T

his

CM

MI

prac

tice

ass

umes

the

exis

tenc

e

of a

n or

gani

zati

onal

pra

ctic

e or

pra

ctic

es.

TS

P a

s fo

rmal

ly d

efin

ed is

a s

tand

-alo

ne

proc

ess,

but

one

whi

ch s

peci

fica

lly

call

s fo

r

team

s to

use

or

build

on

orga

niza

tiona

l

proc

esse

s an

d fa

cili

ties

, if

avai

labl

e.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

LA

U8,

RE

L

For

ms:

SU

MS,

SU

MP

, TA

SK

1.3.

Int

egra

te th

e pr

ojec

t pla

n an

d th

e ot

her

plan

s th

at a

ffec

t the

pro

ject

to d

escr

ibe

the

proj

ect’

s de

fine

d pr

oces

s.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

and

proc

ess

man

ager

s

The

ove

rall

pro

ject

pla

n co

nsol

idat

es in

divi

dual

proj

ect p

lans

, a to

p-do

wn

over

all p

roje

ct p

lan,

a

proc

ess

plan

for

dev

elop

ing

need

ed p

roce

sses

,

and,

if n

eces

sary

, tra

inin

g pl

ans.

Typ

ical

ly th

e

team

lead

er, i

n co

mbi

nati

on w

ith

the

plan

ning

and

proc

ess

man

ager

s, d

eals

wit

h va

riou

s as

pect

s

of th

ese

acti

viti

es.

D/S

P

lans

of

rele

vant

sta

keho

lder

s ar

e no

t

expl

icit

ly a

ddre

ssed

but

are

typi

call

y

coor

dina

ted

by th

e te

am le

ader

or

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

39

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

WE

EK

and

asso

ciat

ed

mee

ting

min

utes

, tea

m

and

indi

vidu

al

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

and

proc

ess

man

ager

s

1.4.

Man

age

the

proj

ect u

sing

the

proj

ect

plan

, the

oth

er p

lans

that

aff

ect t

he p

roje

ct,

and

the

proj

ect’

s de

fine

d pr

oces

s.

Oth

er:

NO

TE

BO

OK

The

pro

ject

team

, led

by

the

team

lead

er,

man

ages

itse

lf a

s ev

iden

ced

by th

e w

eekl

y

cons

olid

atio

n of

indi

vidu

al d

ata,

sta

tus

mee

ting

s,

note

s, a

nd m

eeti

ng m

inut

es. T

he p

lann

ing

man

ager

is r

espo

nsib

le f

or th

e co

nsol

idat

ion

and

mee

ting

min

utes

, and

cap

ture

s th

is d

ata

wee

kly

in th

e pr

ojec

t NO

TE

BO

OK

. The

pro

cess

man

ager

rep

orts

as

need

ed o

n th

e st

ate

of th

e

proj

ect’

s pr

oces

s as

sets

.

D/S

T

SP

add

ress

es th

e pr

ojec

t pla

n an

d th

e

proj

ect’

s de

fine

d pr

oces

s, b

ut n

ot e

xpli

citl

y

“the

oth

er p

lans

.” T

hese

issu

es a

re ty

pica

lly

coor

dina

ted

by th

e te

am le

ader

or

the

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

.

Scri

pts:

PM

,

LA

UP

M

For

ms:

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

1.5.

Con

trib

ute

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, m

easu

res,

and

docu

men

ted

expe

rien

ces

to th

e

orga

niza

tion

al p

roce

ss a

sset

s.

Oth

er:

SU

MM

AR

Y,

NO

TE

BO

OK

In a

ddit

ion

to d

eliv

erab

le w

ork

prod

ucts

, the

TSP

team

gat

hers

and

ana

lyze

s it

s pr

oces

s da

ta

regu

larl

y at

pos

tmor

tem

s. T

he S

UM

MA

RY

repo

rt a

nd p

roje

ct N

OT

EB

OO

K p

rovi

de

abun

dant

pro

cess

dat

a an

d do

cum

enta

tion

suit

able

for

an

orga

niza

tion

al m

easu

rem

ent

repo

sito

ry a

nd p

roce

ss a

sset

libr

ary.

D/S

T

he in

tent

of

this

pra

ctic

e, n

amel

y th

e

avai

labi

lity

of

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, m

easu

res,

and

docu

men

ted

expe

rien

ces,

see

ms

to b

e

fulf

ille

d, r

egar

dles

s of

the

form

of

the

orga

niza

tion

al r

epos

itory

.

40

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG2.

Coo

rdin

atio

n an

d co

llabo

rati

on o

f

the

proj

ect

wit

h re

leva

nt s

take

hold

ers

is

cond

ucte

d.

Scri

pts:

LA

U

(esp

. LA

U1

and

LA

U9)

, WE

EK

,

RE

L

For

ms:

ST

AT

US

2.1.

Man

age

the

invo

lvem

ent o

f th

e re

leva

nt

stak

ehol

ders

in th

e pr

ojec

t.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

As

the

prin

cipa

l sta

keho

lder

s, m

anag

emen

t and

the

proj

ect t

eam

kee

p ea

ch o

ther

info

rmed

of

proj

ect s

tatu

s an

d of

cha

nges

in p

lans

and

/or

com

mit

men

ts v

ia th

e la

unch

/rel

aunc

h

mec

hani

sms,

reg

ular

sta

tus

repo

rtin

g, a

nd

repl

anni

ng a

s ne

cess

ary.

The

rol

e m

anag

ers,

espe

cial

ly th

e te

am le

ader

, dea

l wit

h ot

her

stak

ehol

ders

as

nece

ssar

y.

D/S

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

For

ms:

ST

AT

US

2.2.

Par

tici

pate

wit

h re

leva

nt s

take

hold

ers

to id

enti

fy, n

egot

iate

, and

trac

k cr

itic

al

depe

nden

cies

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

The

team

lead

er is

res

pons

ible

for

res

olvi

ng

issu

es w

ith

man

agem

ent a

nd o

ther

team

s or

depa

rtm

ents

. Som

e sp

ecif

ic s

take

hold

ers

are

hand

led

by th

e re

leva

nt r

ole

man

ager

s (e

.g.,

qual

ity

man

ager

wit

h Q

A, t

est m

anag

er w

ith

a

test

gro

up, o

r cu

stom

er in

terf

ace

man

ager

wit

h

an in

tern

al o

r ex

tern

al c

usto

mer

). T

eam

mem

bers

repo

rt w

eekl

y to

the

team

on

any

spec

ial

depe

nden

cies

.

D/S

Lau

nch

prep

arat

ions

incl

ude

defi

ning

who

,

asid

e fr

om s

enio

r m

anag

emen

t and

mar

keti

ng, a

re r

elev

ant s

take

hold

ers

for

the

proj

ect i

n qu

esti

on, b

ut o

nly

man

agem

ent

and

mar

keti

ng a

re s

ingl

ed o

ut b

y T

SP

as

“sig

nifi

cant

.” D

epen

ding

on

the

part

icul

ars

of th

e pr

ojec

t and

the

orga

niza

tion,

TSP

may

com

plet

ely

(D)

addr

ess

thes

e pr

acti

ces

or p

rovi

de a

con

veni

ent p

roje

ct f

ram

ewor

k

for

doin

g so

(S)

.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

41

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

For

ms:

ST

AT

US

2.3.

Res

olve

issu

es w

ith

rele

vant

stak

ehol

ders

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

The

team

lead

er is

res

pons

ible

for

res

olvi

ng

issu

es w

ith

man

agem

ent a

nd o

ther

team

s or

depa

rtm

ents

. The

rel

evan

t rol

e m

anag

ers

may

hand

le s

ome

stak

ehol

der

inte

ract

ions

(e.

g.,

qual

ity

man

ager

wit

h Q

A, t

est m

anag

er w

ith

a

test

gro

up, c

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e m

anag

er w

ith

an

inte

rnal

or

exte

rnal

cus

tom

er).

D/S

42

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

6.1.

4 In

teg

rate

d P

roje

ct M

anag

emen

t (I

PM

SG

3, S

G4)

– IP

PD

The

Int

egra

ted

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

t for

IPP

D p

roce

ss a

rea

also

cre

ates

the

shar

ed v

isio

n fo

r th

e pr

ojec

t. T

his

shar

ed v

isio

n sh

ould

alig

n bo

th

hori

zont

ally

and

ver

tical

ly w

ith

both

the

orga

niza

tion’

s an

d th

e in

tegr

ated

team

’s s

hare

d vi

sion

s, c

reat

ed in

the

Org

aniz

atio

nal E

nvir

onm

ent f

or

Inte

grat

ion

(OE

I) a

nd I

nteg

rate

d Te

amin

g (I

T)

proc

ess

area

s, r

espe

ctiv

ely.

The

se s

hare

d vi

sion

s co

llect

ivel

y su

ppor

t the

coo

rdin

atio

n an

d co

llabo

ratio

n am

ong

stak

ehol

ders

. Fin

ally

, the

Int

egra

ted

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

t for

IPP

D p

roce

ss a

rea

impl

emen

ts a

n in

tegr

ated

team

str

uctu

re to

pe

rfor

m th

e w

ork

of th

e pr

ojec

t in

deve

lopi

ng a

pro

duct

. Thi

s te

am s

truc

ture

is ty

pica

lly b

ased

on

the

deco

mpo

sitio

n of

the

prod

uct i

tsel

f, m

uch

like

a

wor

k br

eakd

own

stru

ctur

e. T

he a

ctiv

ity is

acc

ompl

ishe

d in

con

junc

tion

with

the

Inte

grat

ed T

eam

ing

proc

ess

area

.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG3.

The

pro

ject

is c

ondu

cted

usi

ng t

he

proj

ect’

s sh

ared

vis

ion.

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, L

AU

1,

LA

U

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

3.1.

Ide

ntif

y ex

pect

atio

ns, c

onst

rain

ts,

inte

rfac

es, a

nd o

pera

tion

al c

ondi

tions

appl

icab

le to

the

proj

ect’

s sh

ared

vis

ion.

Oth

er: S

enio

r

man

agem

ent

and

mar

keti

ng

disc

ussi

on

guid

elin

es

The

dis

cuss

ion

guid

elin

es f

or m

anag

emen

t and

mar

keti

ng g

o be

yond

a d

iscu

ssio

n of

goa

ls. I

n

addi

tion,

con

stra

ints

on

sche

dule

, bud

get,

and

reso

urce

s, a

cces

s to

cus

tom

ers

or o

ther

dom

ain

expe

rts,

and

oth

er r

elev

ant o

pera

tion

al c

ondi

tion

s

are

pres

ente

d. T

he te

am q

uest

ions

the

pres

enta

tion

s to

ens

ure

that

they

und

erst

and

both

the

goal

s an

d co

nstr

aint

s. O

ther

con

stra

ints

beco

me

appa

rent

as

plan

s ar

e w

orke

d ou

t ove

r

the

bala

nce

of th

e la

unch

(L

AU

).

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

43

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U2,

RE

L1,

WE

EK

For

ms:

GO

AL

3.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

a sh

ared

vis

ion

for

the

proj

ect.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

bers

In L

AU

2, th

e te

am d

iscu

sses

man

agem

ent’

s

goal

s an

d ob

ject

ives

for

the

proj

ect a

nd c

omes

to

cons

ensu

s on

the

team

’s g

oals

, doc

umen

ted

on

form

GO

AL

. Fol

low

ing

the

laun

ch a

nd a

t

rela

unch

es, t

he te

am le

ader

rep

rese

nts

man

agem

ent t

o th

e te

am, a

nd th

e te

am to

man

agem

ent,

to e

nsur

e th

at th

e sh

ared

vis

ion

from

the

init

ial l

aunc

h is

mai

ntai

ned

and

to

com

mun

icat

e ch

ange

s to

the

visi

on a

s ne

cess

ary.

Wee

kly

team

mee

ting

s th

at r

evie

w g

oals

and

stat

us e

nsur

e re

info

rcem

ent o

f th

e vi

sion

that

was

esta

blis

hed

duri

ng th

e la

unch

.

D

SG4.

The

inte

grat

ed t

eam

s ne

eded

to

exec

ute

the

proj

ect

are

iden

tifi

ed,

defi

ned,

str

uctu

red,

and

tas

ked.

4.1.

Det

erm

ine

the

inte

grat

ed te

am s

truc

ture

that

wil

l bes

t mee

t the

pro

ject

obj

ecti

ves

and

cons

trai

nts.

TS

Pm

* pr

oces

s

asse

ts

For

larg

er p

roje

cts

(def

ined

as

havi

ng m

ore

than

12 to

15

mem

bers

), T

SP

m la

unch

pre

para

tion

s

incl

ude

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f a

proj

ect s

trat

egy

that

allo

ws

prel

imin

ary

esti

mat

es o

f th

e nu

mbe

r, s

ize,

and

tech

nica

l res

pons

ibil

ities

of

each

par

t of

an

inte

grat

ed te

am.

D

Use

of

the

TS

Pm

ass

ets

prob

ably

bec

omes

a

nece

ssit

y so

mew

here

in th

e ra

nge

of 2

0 to

30 p

eopl

e. B

elow

that

num

ber,

fai

rly

obvi

ous

adap

tatio

ns o

f th

e T

SP (

e.g.

,

brea

king

off

sub

team

s to

dea

l wit

h la

rge

func

tion

al c

hunk

s of

the

syst

em o

r al

ong

44

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

4.2.

Dev

elop

a p

reli

min

ary

dist

ribu

tion

of

requ

irem

ents

, res

pons

ibil

itie

s, a

utho

riti

es,

task

s, a

nd in

terf

aces

to te

ams

in th

e se

lect

ed

inte

grat

ed te

am s

truc

ture

.

TS

Pm

* pr

oces

s

asse

ts

The

TS

Pm

pro

duct

str

ateg

y ca

ptur

es

arch

itec

ture

, sys

tem

inte

grat

ion,

incr

emen

tal

deve

lopm

ent,

prot

otyp

ing,

and

tech

nolo

gy is

sues

that

are

then

use

d to

mak

e in

itia

l tea

m

assi

gnm

ents

for

req

uire

men

ts a

nd in

terf

aces

.

Man

agem

ent a

lso

deci

des

if a

dditi

onal

rol

es a

nd

resp

onsi

bili

ties

bey

ond

the

basi

c T

SP

rol

es a

re

nece

ssar

y.

D

4.3.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

team

s in

the

inte

grat

ed te

am s

truc

ture

.

TS

Pm

* pr

oces

s

asse

ts

The

team

s de

velo

p in

tegr

ated

pla

ns a

nd w

orki

ng

proc

edur

es d

urin

g th

e T

SPm

laun

ch, w

hich

incl

udes

add

itio

nal m

eeti

ngs

dail

y du

ring

the

laun

ch to

coo

rdin

ate

plan

s an

d ra

ise

com

mon

issu

es. W

eekl

y m

eeti

ngs

by e

ach

of th

e te

ams,

betw

een

each

of

the

team

lead

ers

and

an o

vera

ll

inte

grat

ed p

roje

ct m

anag

er (

the

lead

ersh

ip te

am),

and

betw

een

like

rol

e m

anag

ers

from

eac

h te

am

deal

wit

h ov

eral

l pro

ject

sta

tus

and

issu

es.

D

func

tion

al s

peci

alti

es)

can

mee

t the

inte

nt o

f

thes

e pr

acti

ces.

As

of th

is w

riti

ng, t

he

TS

Pm

ass

ets

are

avai

labl

e fr

om th

e S

EI

on a

case

-by-

case

bas

is.

* T

SP

m: T

he T

SP

ext

ensi

on f

or m

ulti

ple

team

s. T

SP

m is

rec

omm

ende

d be

ginn

ing

whe

n a

sing

le te

am g

row

s la

rger

than

12

to

15 p

eopl

e. T

hese

pro

cess

ass

ets

are

not

refe

renc

ed e

lsew

here

for

two

reas

ons:

(1)

they

are

not

nec

essa

ry f

or u

nder

stan

ding

how

the

“sin

gle

team

” T

SP

rel

ates

to

CM

MI

and

(2)

wit

h th

e ex

cept

ion

of th

is

goal

and

its

prac

tice

s, th

e T

SPm

supp

lem

ents

TS

P c

over

age

of s

peci

fic

prac

tice

s ra

ther

than

rep

laci

ng it

. (S

ee a

lso

IT S

P 2

.5.)

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

45

6.1.

5 R

isk

Man

agem

ent

(RS

KM

)

The

Ris

k M

anag

emen

t (R

SKM

) pr

oces

s ar

ea ta

kes

a m

ore

cont

inui

ng, f

orw

ard-

look

ing

appr

oach

to m

anag

ing

risk

s w

ith a

ctiv

itie

s th

at in

clud

e id

entif

icat

ion

of r

isk

para

met

ers,

ris

k as

sess

men

ts, a

nd r

isk

hand

ling.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Pre

para

tion

for

ris

k m

anag

emen

t is

cond

ucte

d.

Scri

pts:

LA

U7

For

ms:

IR

TL

1.1.

Det

erm

ine

risk

sou

rces

and

cat

egor

ies.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

LA

U7

defi

nes

a ri

sk a

s so

met

hing

that

may

or

may

not

occ

ur. T

he p

roje

ct te

am b

rain

stor

ms

risk

s in

this

mee

ting

. Whi

le c

ateg

orie

s ca

n be

as

broa

d as

the

imag

inat

ion

of th

e pr

ojec

t tea

m, t

he

team

gen

eral

ly f

ram

es r

isks

in te

rms

of th

e

pote

ntia

l eff

ect o

n th

e go

als

set a

nd th

e pl

ans

mad

e du

ring

the

laun

ch.

P/S

S

tand

ard

risk

taxo

nom

ies,

eit

her

from

indu

stry

or

the

orga

niza

tion

, are

oft

en

refe

renc

ed d

urin

g th

e la

unch

, but

thes

e ar

e

not c

alle

d fo

r sp

ecif

ical

ly in

the

TSP

scr

ipts

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U7,

WE

EK

For

ms:

IR

TL

1.2.

Def

ine

the

para

met

ers

used

to a

naly

ze

and

cate

gori

ze r

isks

and

the

para

met

ers

used

to c

ontr

ol th

e ri

sk m

anag

emen

t eff

ort.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

In L

AU

7, r

isks

are

cat

egor

ized

as

high

, med

ium

,

or lo

w in

term

s of

like

liho

od o

f oc

curr

ence

and

as h

avin

g po

tent

iall

y hi

gh, m

ediu

m, o

r lo

w e

ffec

t

on th

e ac

hiev

emen

t of

the

team

’s d

efin

ed g

oals

.

In g

ener

al, t

eam

con

sens

us is

use

d to

det

erm

ine

thes

e li

keli

hood

s an

d ef

fect

s. D

urin

g th

e w

eekl

y

team

mee

ting

, ris

ks a

re r

evie

wed

for

cha

nges

in

like

liho

od o

r li

kely

eff

ect o

n th

e pr

ojec

t’s

plan

s.

D

46

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U7,

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

IT

L

1.3.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

stra

tegy

to

be u

sed

for

risk

man

agem

ent.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

The

team

iden

tifi

es a

nd d

ocum

ents

ris

ks d

urin

g

each

laun

ch a

nd r

elau

nch

and

assi

gns

sign

ific

ant

risk

s to

a te

am m

embe

r fo

r tr

acki

ng a

nd

deve

lopi

ng o

f m

itig

atin

g ac

tion

s (L

AU

7). E

ach

team

mem

ber

assi

gned

to a

ris

k is

res

pons

ible

for

deve

lopi

ng a

mit

igat

ion

plan

for

the

risk

,

mon

itor

ing

and

repo

rtin

g on

the

risk

as

appr

opri

ate

at th

e w

eekl

y te

am m

eeti

ng, a

nd

reco

mm

endi

ng a

ctio

n to

the

team

, usu

ally

dur

ing

the

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

(W

EE

K).

The

team

lead

er r

epor

ts o

n si

gnif

ican

t ris

ks to

man

agem

ent

(ST

AT

US)

.

D

SG2.

Ris

ks a

re id

enti

fied

and

ana

lyze

d to

dete

rmin

e th

eir

rela

tive

impo

rtan

ce.

Scri

pts:

LA

U7,

WE

EK

For

ms:

IT

L

2.1.

Ide

ntif

y an

d do

cum

ent t

he r

isks

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

In L

AU

7, th

e te

am le

ader

gui

des

the

team

in th

e

syst

emat

ic id

enti

fica

tion

and

doc

umen

tati

on o

f

proj

ect r

isks

on

ITL

. Ris

ks a

lso

ofte

n ar

ise

and

are

docu

men

ted

duri

ng o

ther

laun

ch m

eeti

ngs

and/

or a

rise

dur

ing

the

proj

ect a

nd a

re

docu

men

ted

at th

e w

eekl

y te

am m

eeti

ng

(WE

EK

).

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

47

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U7

For

ms:

IT

L

2.2.

Eva

luat

e an

d ca

tego

rize

eac

h id

enti

fied

risk

usi

ng th

e de

fine

d ri

sk c

ateg

orie

s an

d

para

met

ers

and

dete

rmin

e it

s re

lati

ve

prio

rity

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

The

team

lead

er le

ads

eval

uati

on a

nd

cate

gori

zati

on o

f ea

ch r

isk

in te

rms

of h

igh,

med

ium

, or

low

like

liho

od a

nd h

igh,

med

ium

, or

low

eff

ect o

n th

e pr

ojec

t pla

n. S

imil

ar r

isks

are

gene

rall

y cl

uste

red

or c

olla

psed

toge

ther

.

D

SG3.

Ris

ks a

re h

andl

ed a

nd m

itig

ated

,

whe

re a

ppro

pria

te, t

o re

duce

adv

erse

impa

cts

on a

chie

ving

obj

ecti

ves.

Scri

pts:

LA

U7

For

ms:

IT

L

3.1.

Dev

elop

a r

isk

mit

igat

ion

plan

for

the

mos

t im

port

ant r

isks

to th

e pr

ojec

t, as

defi

ned

by th

e ri

sk m

anag

emen

t str

ateg

y.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

All

ris

ks r

ated

“hi

gh”

or “

med

ium

” in

term

s of

both

like

liho

od a

nd im

pact

are

ass

igne

d to

a

team

mem

ber

or th

e te

am le

ader

for

dev

elop

men

t

of a

mit

igat

ion

plan

and

for

trac

king

as

appr

opri

ate

duri

ng th

e pr

ojec

t.

D

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

For

ms:

IT

L,

ST

AT

US

3.2.

Mon

itor

the

stat

us o

f ea

ch r

isk

peri

odic

ally

and

impl

emen

t the

ris

k

mit

igat

ion

plan

as

appr

opri

ate.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Eac

h te

am m

embe

r de

velo

ps a

mit

igat

ion

plan

for

and

mon

itor

s as

sign

ed r

isks

, rep

orts

as

nece

ssar

y du

ring

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

s, a

nd

reco

mm

ends

ena

ctm

ent o

f m

itig

atio

n ac

tions

as

appr

opri

ate.

The

team

lead

er r

epor

ts th

e st

atus

of

sign

ific

ant r

isks

to m

anag

emen

t as

nece

ssar

y.

D

48

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

6.1.

6 In

teg

rate

d T

eam

ing

(IT

) –

IPP

D

The

Int

egra

ted

Team

ing

(IT

) pr

oces

s ar

ea p

rovi

des

for

the

form

atio

n an

d su

stai

nmen

t of

each

inte

grat

ed te

am. P

art o

f su

stai

ning

the

team

is th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

the

inte

grat

ed te

am’s

sha

red

visi

on, w

hich

mus

t ali

gn w

ith th

e pr

ojec

t’s a

nd th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

sha

red

visi

ons,

dev

elop

ed in

the

Inte

grat

ed P

roje

ct M

anag

emen

t for

IPP

D a

nd O

rgan

izat

iona

l Env

iron

men

t for

Int

egra

tion

(O

EI)

pro

cess

are

as. T

he s

peci

fic

prac

tice

s in

the

OE

I an

d IT

pro

cess

are

as th

en s

et th

e en

viro

nmen

t for

ena

blin

g in

tegr

ated

team

wor

k. I

n ad

ditio

n, th

e In

tegr

ated

Tea

min

g pr

oces

s ar

ea in

tera

cts

with

oth

er

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

t pro

cess

es b

y su

pply

ing

team

com

mit

men

ts, w

ork

plan

s, a

nd o

ther

info

rmat

ion

that

for

m th

e ba

sis

for

man

agin

g th

e pr

ojec

t and

su

ppor

ting

risk

man

agem

ent.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

A t

eam

com

posi

tion

tha

t pr

ovid

es

the

know

ledg

e an

d sk

ills

requ

ired

to

deliv

er t

he t

eam

’s p

rodu

ct is

est

ablis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6

For

ms:

SU

MS,

SU

MQ

, TA

SK

1.1.

Ide

ntif

y an

d de

fine

the

team

’s s

peci

fic

inte

rnal

task

s to

gen

erat

e th

e te

am’s

expe

cted

out

puts

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Out

puts

are

iden

tifie

d in

LA

U3,

alo

ng w

ith

a

gene

ral s

trat

egy

and

high

-lev

el p

roce

ss to

prod

uce

them

. The

pro

cess

is in

stan

tiat

ed a

t the

team

leve

l in

LA

U4

and

at th

e in

divi

dual

leve

l in

LA

U6.

D

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, L

AU

1,

LA

U3

1.2.

Ide

ntif

y th

e kn

owle

dge,

ski

lls,

and

func

tion

al e

xper

tise

nee

ded

to p

erfo

rm te

am

task

s.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er

The

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n se

quen

ce r

equi

res

appr

opri

ate

trai

ning

in T

SP

pro

cess

es a

nd

prin

cipl

es, w

hile

ens

urin

g th

at th

e tr

aini

ng h

as

been

del

iver

ed is

on

the

PR

EP

L/P

RE

PR

chec

klis

ts. T

he te

am is

enc

oura

ged

to a

sk a

bout

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

49

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

sequ

ence

“exp

ert a

ssis

tanc

e” d

urin

g L

AU

1. T

he te

am

lead

er is

cha

rged

wit

h en

suri

ng th

at th

e te

am

mem

bers

’ sk

ills

and

abi

liti

es a

re c

onsi

sten

t wit

h

thei

r re

spon

sibi

liti

es. I

n L

AU

3, th

e te

am o

ften

iden

tifi

es s

peci

fic

expe

rtis

e or

trai

ning

nee

ded.

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R

For

ms:

TA

SK

1.3.

Ass

ign

the

appr

opri

ate

pers

onne

l to

be

team

mem

bers

bas

ed o

n re

quir

ed

know

ledg

e an

d sk

ills

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Pre

para

tion

for

laun

ch a

nd r

elau

nch

incl

udes

assi

gnin

g ca

pabl

e pe

rson

nel a

nd e

nsur

ing

that

they

all

rec

eive

app

ropr

iate

PSP

and

TSP

trai

ning

. The

team

lead

er m

anag

es p

roje

ct

staf

fing

, rec

ruit

ing,

and

trai

ning

and

con

side

rs

team

mem

bers

’ in

tere

sts

and

abil

ities

in m

akin

g

job

assi

gnm

ents

. Ind

ivid

ual t

eam

mem

bers

arra

nge

for

and

get t

he e

duca

tion

and

trai

ning

need

ed to

do

supe

rior

wor

k. B

oth

the

assi

gnm

ents

and

add

ition

al p

rofe

ssio

nal t

rain

ing

typi

call

y ar

e re

flec

ted

in in

divi

dual

TA

SK

pla

ns.

D

SG2.

Ope

rati

on o

f th

e in

tegr

ated

tea

m is

gove

rned

acc

ordi

ng t

o es

tabl

ishe

d

prin

cipl

es.

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, L

AU

1,

LA

U2

2.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

a sh

ared

vis

ion

for

the

inte

grat

ed te

am th

at is

ali

gned

wit

h

any

over

arch

ing

or h

ighe

r le

vel v

isio

n.

For

ms:

GO

AL

As

sugg

este

d by

the

prep

arat

ion

guid

elin

es, i

n

LA

U1

man

agem

ent a

nd m

arke

ting

pre

sent

the

team

wit

h th

e pr

ojec

t’s

goal

s fo

r th

e or

gani

zati

on

and

the

prod

uct,

resp

ecti

vely

. The

team

ask

s

D

50

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Oth

er: L

aunc

h

prep

arat

ion

guid

elin

es

ques

tion

s to

ens

ure

that

they

und

erst

and

thes

e

goal

s. I

n L

AU

2, th

e te

am a

chie

ves

cons

ensu

s

unde

r th

e gu

idan

ce o

f th

e te

am le

ader

and

laun

ch

coac

h an

d fo

rmal

izes

its

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

thes

e

goal

s an

d do

cum

ents

them

on

form

GO

AL

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

LA

U2,

WE

EK

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

GO

AL

2.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

a te

am c

hart

er

base

d on

the

inte

grat

ed te

am’s

sha

red

visi

on

and

over

all t

eam

obj

ecti

ves.

Rol

es:

Tea

m le

ader

,

team

mem

ber

The

team

lead

er a

nd te

am m

embe

r ro

le

spec

ific

atio

ns f

orm

the

grou

ndw

ork

for

team

inte

ract

ions

. The

laun

ches

and

wee

kly

mee

ting

s

esta

blis

h an

d re

info

rce

the

proc

ess

orie

ntat

ion

of

usin

g th

e T

SP. T

he s

peci

fic

goal

sta

tem

ents

prod

uced

by

the

team

in L

AU

2 an

d do

cum

ente

d

on th

e G

OA

L f

orm

pro

vide

dir

ectio

n an

d fo

cus

for

dail

y ac

tivi

ties

.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U2,

RO

LE

,

RO

LE

MX

,

WE

EK

, IN

S

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

GO

AL

2.3.

Cle

arly

def

ine

and

mai

ntai

n ea

ch te

am

mem

ber’

s ro

les

and

resp

onsi

bili

ties.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

The

team

lead

er is

ass

igne

d by

man

agem

ent.

All

othe

r “m

anag

er”

role

s ar

e ne

goti

ated

dur

ing

LA

U2

and

are

capt

ured

on

RO

LE

and

RO

LE

MX

. Add

itio

nal t

eam

rol

es m

ay b

e

defi

ned.

Som

e st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

incl

ude

spec

ial

role

s (W

EE

K, I

NS)

.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

51

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

WE

EK

For

ms:

IN

V,

MT

G, I

NS

2.4.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

inte

grat

ed te

am

oper

atin

g pr

oced

ures

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m le

ader

,

proc

ess

man

ager

Lau

nche

s an

d w

eekl

y te

am m

eeti

ngs

form

the

basi

s of

the

team

’s o

pera

ting

pro

cedu

res.

The

need

s fo

r ot

her

proc

esse

s ar

e id

enti

fied

dur

ing

the

laun

ch a

nd r

ecor

ded

on I

NV

. Cer

tain

stan

dard

pro

cess

es s

uch

as M

TG

and

IN

S

prov

ide

base

line

s to

be

used

and

ada

pted

for

the

team

’s n

eeds

.

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.5.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

coll

abor

atio

n

amon

g in

terf

acin

g te

ams.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

The

team

lead

er is

exp

lici

tly

resp

onsi

ble

for

inte

rfac

ing

wit

h ot

her

team

s, d

eleg

atin

g w

ell-

defi

ned

issu

es to

the

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

s,

and

deal

ing

wit

h ot

hers

as

nece

ssar

y.

D/S

W

hile

sta

ndar

d T

SP p

ract

ice

seem

s

adeq

uate

for

this

spe

cifi

c pr

acti

ce, T

SP

m

(the

TS

P e

xten

sion

for

mul

tipl

e te

ams)

has

muc

h m

ore

expl

icit

sup

port

for

cro

ss-t

eam

coll

abor

atio

n. (

See

IP

M –

IP

PD

SG

4 no

tes

for

mor

e in

form

atio

n.)

52

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

6.1.

7 Q

uan

tita

tive

Pro

ject

Man

agem

ent

(QP

M)

The

Qua

ntita

tive

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

t (Q

PM)

proc

ess

area

app

lies

qua

ntita

tive

and

stat

istic

al te

chni

ques

to th

e m

anag

emen

t of

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

an

d pr

oduc

t qua

lity.

Qua

lity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

obj

ectiv

es f

or th

e pr

ojec

t are

bas

ed o

n th

ose

esta

blis

hed

by th

e or

gani

zatio

n. T

he p

roje

ct’s

de

fine

d pr

oces

s co

mpr

ises

, in

part

, pro

cess

ele

men

ts a

nd s

ubpr

oces

ses

who

se p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce c

an b

e pr

edic

ted.

At a

min

imum

, the

pro

cess

va

riat

ion

expe

rien

ced

by s

ubpr

oces

ses

that

is c

ritic

al to

ach

ievi

ng th

e pr

ojec

t’s q

ualit

y an

d pr

oces

s pe

rfor

man

ce o

bjec

tives

is u

nder

stoo

d. C

orre

ctiv

e ac

tion

is ta

ken

whe

n sp

ecia

l cau

ses

of p

roce

ss v

aria

tion

are

iden

tifie

d.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

The

pro

ject

is q

uant

itat

ivel

y

man

aged

usi

ng q

ualit

y an

d pr

oces

s-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves.

Scri

pts:

LA

U2,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6,

RE

L

For

ms:

GO

AL

,

TS

P w

orkb

ook

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

proj

ect’

s

qual

ity

and

proc

ess-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, p

roce

ss

and

qual

ity

man

ager

In th

e la

unch

, the

team

est

abli

shes

qua

ntit

ativ

e

qual

ity

obje

ctiv

es f

or d

efec

t den

siti

es in

late

test

ing

phas

es a

nd/o

r ac

tual

use

, alo

ng w

ith

plan

s

for

revi

ew r

ates

and

yie

lds.

LA

U2

may

als

o

form

ulat

e ot

her

qual

ity

obje

ctiv

es. A

ll p

lans

are

subj

ect t

o re

visi

on a

s th

e pr

ojec

t pro

gres

ses,

espe

cial

ly d

urin

g re

laun

ches

. In

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

and

LA

U6,

the

proj

ect p

lan

is b

uilt

aro

und

para

met

ers

cons

iste

nt w

ith

achi

evem

ent o

f th

e

qual

ity

obje

ctiv

es a

nd p

erfo

rman

ce g

oals

set

in

LA

U2.

GO

AL

doc

umen

ts p

arti

cula

r

resp

onsi

bili

ties

(ty

pica

lly

for

the

team

lead

er,

proc

ess

man

ager

, or

qual

ity m

anag

er)

for

trac

king

per

form

ance

aga

inst

thes

e ob

ject

ives

duri

ng th

e pr

ojec

t.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

53

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6,

RE

L

For

ms:

TS

P

wor

kboo

k, e

sp.

SU

MQ

, TA

SK

,

and

WE

EK

Rol

es: A

ll r

ole

man

ager

s

1.2.

Sel

ect t

he s

ubpr

oces

ses

that

com

pose

the

proj

ect’

s de

fine

d pr

oces

s ba

sed

on

hist

oric

al s

tabi

lity

and

cap

abil

ity

data

.

Oth

er: P

lann

ing

and

qual

ity

guid

elin

es

By

defa

ult,

TS

P id

enti

fies

ear

ly d

efec

t rem

oval

and

cont

inuo

us m

anag

emen

t of

tim

e on

task

as

crit

ical

sub

proc

esse

s. T

he te

am m

ay id

enti

fy

othe

rs to

rep

lace

or

supp

lem

ent t

hese

dur

ing

the

laun

ch o

r as

the

proj

ect p

rogr

esse

s. T

he te

am’s

defi

ned

proc

ess

from

LA

U3,

as

inst

anti

ated

in

LA

U4

(TA

SK

), L

AU

5 (S

UM

Q),

and

LA

U6

(ind

ivid

ual T

AS

K p

lans

) fo

cus

on e

arly

def

ect

rem

oval

. Bot

h co

nsol

idat

ed a

nd in

divi

dual

WE

EK

for

ms

prov

ide

the

focu

s fo

r m

anag

ing

tim

e on

task

thro

ugho

ut th

e pr

ojec

t. In

the

abse

nce

of h

isto

rica

l dat

a (a

s in

a f

irst

-tim

e

laun

ch in

an

orga

niza

tion

), th

e pl

anni

ng a

nd

qual

ity

guid

elin

es a

re u

sed

to e

stab

lish

reas

onab

le p

lans

and

exp

ecta

tion

s.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U2,

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6

For

ms:

GO

AL

,

TS

P w

orkb

ook

1.3.

Sel

ect t

he s

ubpr

oces

ses

of th

e pr

ojec

t’s

defi

ned

proc

ess

that

wil

l be

stat

istic

ally

man

aged

.

Rol

es: R

elev

ant

role

man

ager

s,

team

mem

ber

Goa

ls e

stab

lish

ed in

LA

U2

and

docu

men

ted

in

GO

AL

dri

ve s

ched

ule

and

qual

ity

plan

ning

thro

ugh

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

and

LA

U6.

Sch

edul

e go

als

typi

call

y gu

ide

both

sch

edul

e an

d

effo

rt p

lann

ing,

whi

le q

uali

ty g

oals

gui

de th

e

qual

ity

plan

and

indi

vidu

al p

lans

to m

aint

ain

such

thin

gs a

s re

view

rat

es (

for

both

per

sona

l

revi

ews

and

team

insp

ecti

ons)

and

pha

se r

atio

s at

D

54

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Oth

er: P

lann

ing

and

qual

ity

guid

elin

es

hist

oric

ally

“go

od”

leve

ls. I

ndiv

idua

l pla

nnin

g

call

s fo

r P

SP-l

evel

pla

ns f

or im

plem

enta

tion

acti

viti

es. R

ole

man

ager

s en

sure

that

the

subj

ects

for

whi

ch th

ey a

re r

espo

nsib

le a

re a

dequ

atel

y

addr

esse

d.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

PM

, ST

AT

US

For

ms:

WE

EK

and

mee

ting

min

utes

, PIP

,

SU

MM

AR

Y

1.4.

Mon

itor

the

proj

ect t

o de

term

ine

whe

ther

the

proj

ect’

s ob

ject

ives

for

qua

lity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

wil

l be

sati

sfie

d,

and

iden

tify

cor

rect

ive

acti

on a

s

appr

opri

ate.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s (e

sp.

qual

ity,

pla

nnin

g

man

ager

s)

Wee

kly

stat

us a

t the

indi

vidu

al a

nd te

am le

vels

mon

itor

s pr

ogre

ss a

gain

st te

am g

oals

, inc

ludi

ng

proc

ess

and

qual

ity

perf

orm

ance

. The

team

lead

er a

nd p

lann

ing

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s

typi

call

y ha

ve p

arti

cula

r re

spon

sibi

liti

es f

or

trac

king

per

form

ance

aga

inst

def

ined

mea

sura

ble

obje

ctiv

es d

urin

g th

e pr

ojec

t. C

orre

ctiv

e ac

tion

s

are

disc

usse

d in

this

con

text

and

take

n as

nece

ssar

y. D

urin

g th

e ph

ase

post

mor

tem

, the

plan

ning

and

qua

lity

man

ager

s le

ad th

e te

am in

revi

ewin

g a

wid

e ra

nge

of p

roce

ss a

nd q

uali

ty

met

rics

, eva

luat

ing

perf

orm

ance

aga

inst

team

goal

s, d

evel

opin

g P

IPs,

and

iden

tifyi

ng n

eede

d

proc

esse

s, tr

aini

ng, t

ools

, sup

port

, or

man

agem

ent a

ctio

ns n

eede

d to

impr

ove

perf

orm

ance

in th

e ne

xt p

hase

of

the

proj

ect.

D

SG2.

The

per

form

ance

of

sele

cted

subp

roce

sses

wit

hin

the

proj

ect’

s de

fine

d

proc

ess

is s

tati

stic

ally

man

aged

.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

55

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U2,

LA

U3,

IN

S,

WE

EK

For

ms:

GO

AL

,

TS

P w

orkb

ook

2.1.

Sel

ect t

he m

easu

res

and

anal

ytic

tech

niqu

es to

be

used

in s

tati

stic

ally

man

agin

g th

e se

lect

ed s

ubpr

oces

ses.

Rol

es: P

lann

ing,

proc

ess,

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s

A s

et o

f ba

se m

easu

res

com

es w

ith

use

of th

e

TS

P (

size

by

com

pone

nt, e

ffor

t by

task

and

phas

e, ta

sk c

ompl

etio

n da

te, d

efec

ts in

ject

ed a

nd

rem

oved

by

com

pone

nt a

nd p

hase

). S

crip

t IN

S

and

its

asso

ciat

ed f

orm

sup

port

cap

ture

/rec

aptu

re

calc

ulat

ions

that

est

imat

e re

mai

ning

def

ects

in a

mod

ule.

The

TS

P to

ol p

rovi

des

data

col

lect

ion

for

thes

e pa

ram

eter

s, a

long

wit

h a

set o

f ba

sic

anal

yses

. The

team

dec

ides

, eit

her

duri

ng th

e

laun

ch o

r at

the

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

, whi

ch

othe

r m

easu

res

and

anal

yses

may

be

usef

ul. T

he

role

man

ager

s, e

spec

iall

y th

e pl

anni

ng, p

roce

ss,

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s, m

ay d

evis

e ad

ditio

nal

anal

yses

in r

espo

nse

to s

peci

fic

issu

es.

D

In g

ener

al, t

he T

SP b

ase

mea

sure

s an

d th

e

stan

dard

ana

lyse

s m

ade

by th

e T

SP

wor

kboo

k pr

ovid

e m

ore

info

rmat

ion

than

the

team

nee

ds to

man

age

itse

lf. I

t is

up to

the

team

to d

eter

min

e w

hat s

ubse

t of

the

data

it u

ses

to m

anag

e cr

itic

al s

ubpr

oces

ses.

Scri

pts:

PM

,

WE

EK

For

ms:

SU

MM

AR

Y,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

2.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

an

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

vari

atio

n of

the

sele

cted

sub

proc

esse

s us

ing

the

sele

cted

mea

sure

s an

d an

alyt

ic te

chni

ques

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing,

proc

ess,

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s

The

var

ious

rol

e m

anag

ers

are

char

ged

wit

h

anal

yzin

g an

d re

port

ing

to th

e te

am w

eekl

y, a

nd

in s

umm

ary

at th

e po

stm

orte

m, o

n th

eir

resp

ecti

ve v

iew

s of

the

proc

ess

data

. The

TS

P

tool

pro

vide

s w

eek-

by-w

eek

char

ting

for

pla

nned

vs. a

ctua

l dat

a on

ear

ned

valu

e an

d ta

sk h

ours

and

by-p

hase

cha

rtin

g fo

r m

any

othe

r pr

oces

s

para

met

ers.

P/S

W

hile

ther

e is

no

expl

icit

req

uire

men

t for

“an

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

vari

atio

n…”

in th

e

role

des

crip

tions

, the

cha

rts

prov

ided

by

the

TS

P to

ol p

rovi

de u

sefu

l dat

a th

at a

re

com

mon

ly u

sed

as th

e ba

sis

for

the

team

to

unde

rsta

nd n

orm

al v

aria

tion

s in

thei

r w

ork

proc

esse

s.

56

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

, PM

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

SU

MM

AR

Y

2.3.

Mon

itor

the

perf

orm

ance

of

the

sele

cted

sub

proc

esse

s to

det

erm

ine

thei

r

capa

bili

ty to

sat

isfy

thei

r qu

alit

y an

d

proc

ess-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves,

and

iden

tify

cor

rect

ive

acti

on a

s ne

cess

ary.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

man

ager

,

proc

ess

man

ager

, qua

lity

man

ager

See

QP

M S

P 1

.4, a

bove

. D

Scri

pts:

PM

For

ms:

SU

MM

AR

Y

2.4.

Rec

ord

stat

istic

al a

nd q

uali

ty

man

agem

ent d

ata

in th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

mea

sure

men

t rep

osito

ry.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

man

ager

,

proc

ess

man

ager

, qua

lity

man

ager

The

pos

tmor

tem

con

soli

date

s th

e av

aila

ble

data

.

The

SU

MM

AR

Y s

peci

fica

tion

pro

vide

s a

conv

enie

nt f

ram

ewor

k fo

r m

akin

g th

e da

ta

avai

labl

e to

man

agem

ent a

nd to

the

rest

of

the

orga

niza

tion

. The

team

lead

er a

nd p

lann

ing

man

ager

, and

the

vari

ous

othe

r ro

le m

anag

ers

as

appr

opri

ate,

are

res

pons

ible

for

ens

urin

g th

e

capt

ure

and

stor

age

of s

tand

ard

TSP

dat

a an

d

othe

r re

leva

nt in

form

atio

n.

P/S

T

his

prac

tice

ass

umes

the

exis

tenc

e of

an

orga

niza

tion

al m

easu

rem

ent r

epos

itor

y.

Whi

le th

e in

tent

of

this

spe

cifi

c pr

acti

ce

(nam

ely,

to r

ecor

d th

e re

leva

nt d

ata)

see

ms

to b

e fu

lfil

led

by th

e T

SP p

ract

ices

cit

ed, i

t

is d

iffi

cult

to “

reco

rd”

data

in (

as o

ppos

ed

to “

cont

ribu

te”

to)

a re

posi

tory

that

doe

s no

t

exis

t. S

ee n

otes

for

IP

M S

P 1

.5 a

bove

.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

57

6.2

TS

P a

nd

Pro

ject

Man

agem

ent

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

es

The

gen

eric

pra

ctic

es o

f th

e pr

ojec

t man

agem

ent P

As

are

pres

ente

d he

re c

olle

ctiv

ely,

rat

her

than

sep

arat

ely

wit

h ea

ch in

divi

dual

PA

, bot

h to

aid

in

unde

rsta

ndin

g ho

w th

e di

ffer

ent T

SP p

roce

ss a

sset

s w

ork

toge

ther

acr

oss

rela

ted

proc

ess

area

s an

d to

em

phas

ize

that

eff

icie

nt C

MM

I im

plem

enta

tion

s of

ten

addr

ess

mul

tiple

mod

el p

ract

ices

wit

h fe

wer

act

ual p

ract

ices

.

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as a

nd O

bser

vatio

ns

Rat

ing

GP

2.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

an

orga

niza

tion

al p

olic

y fo

r pl

anni

ng a

nd

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

A

ll P

roje

ct M

anag

emen

t PA

s: O

rgan

izat

iona

l pol

icie

s ar

e be

yond

the

scop

e of

TS

P.

U

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

,

cust

omiz

ed

MT

G f

orm

s fo

r

each

laun

ch

mee

ting

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er

GP

2.2

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

plan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

Oth

er:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, a

ll

laun

ch g

uida

nce,

all o

ther

pre

-

laun

ch a

sset

s

All

: T

he la

unch

and

rel

aunc

h pr

epar

atio

n gu

idel

ines

add

ress

all

of

the

spec

ific

s of

pla

nnin

g fo

r th

e

laun

ch. S

crip

ts L

AU

and

RE

L c

onta

in a

gen

eric

sch

edul

e fo

r a

laun

ch a

nd r

elau

nch

resp

ecti

vely

;

thes

e ar

e ty

pica

lly

cust

omiz

ed to

the

size

of

the

team

, the

sco

pe o

f th

e pr

ojec

t, an

d or

gani

zati

onal

cons

trai

nts.

The

re is

an

MT

G f

orm

for

eac

h la

unch

mee

ting

con

tain

ing

a no

min

al a

gend

a an

d

sche

dule

that

cor

resp

onds

to th

e sc

ript

for

that

mee

ting

.

PM

C:

The

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

s (W

EE

K)

and

regu

lar

stat

us m

eeti

ngs

wit

h m

anag

emen

t (S

TA

TU

S)

are

the

regu

lar

mec

hani

sms

for

mon

itori

ng a

nd c

ontr

ollin

g th

e pr

ojec

t man

agem

ent p

roce

sses

. The

team

lead

er ty

pica

lly

esta

blis

hes

the

sche

dule

for

thes

e du

ring

the

laun

ch.

RSK

M:

The

age

nda

for

LA

U7

and

the

WE

EK

and

ST

AT

US

scr

ipts

pla

n fo

r id

enti

fyin

g an

d tr

acki

ng

proj

ect r

isks

.

D

58

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as a

nd O

bser

vatio

ns

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts,

WE

EK

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

GP

2.3

. Pro

vide

res

ourc

es f

or p

erfo

rmin

g

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts,

and

prov

idin

g th

e se

rvic

es o

f th

e pr

oces

s.

Oth

er:

All

laun

ch g

uida

nce

All

: L

aunc

h gu

idan

ce m

ater

ials

and

the

laun

ch s

crip

ts r

epea

tedl

y st

ress

the

impo

rtan

ce o

f ha

ving

the

team

lead

er a

nd e

ntir

e pr

ojec

t tea

m p

rese

nt f

or th

e en

tire

laun

ch a

nd o

f ha

ving

a q

uali

fied

laun

ch

coac

h to

gui

de a

nd f

acil

itat

e th

e la

unch

.

PM

C:

The

WE

EK

scr

ipt s

peci

fies

that

the

team

lead

er le

ads

the

wee

kly

mee

ting

and

that

all

team

mem

bers

reg

ular

ly a

tten

d.

D

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts,

WE

EK

For

ms:

RO

LE

,

RO

LE

MX

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

GP

2.4

. Ass

ign

resp

onsi

bili

ty a

nd a

utho

rity

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, a

nd p

rovi

ding

the

serv

ices

of th

e pr

oces

s.

Oth

er:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R

All

: T

he la

unch

coa

ch g

uide

line

s na

mes

the

TS

P c

oach

as

havi

ng p

rim

ary

resp

onsi

bili

ty f

or e

nsur

ing

that

all

par

tici

pant

s ar

e pr

epar

ed f

or th

e la

unch

and

then

ena

ct th

e la

unch

pro

cess

pro

perl

y. T

he

guid

elin

es a

lso

call

on

man

agem

ent t

o na

me

a te

am le

ader

. PR

EP

L a

nd P

RE

PR

req

uire

the

nam

ing

of

a la

unch

coo

rdin

ator

to h

andl

e lo

gist

ic p

repa

rati

ons

for

the

laun

ch. D

urin

g th

e la

unch

the

team

lead

er

and

mos

t rol

e m

anag

ers

take

spe

cifi

c re

spon

sibi

lity

for

cer

tain

ste

ps o

f th

e la

unch

pro

cess

as

desi

gnat

ed in

the

laun

ch s

crip

ts. R

ole

man

ager

s ar

e na

med

dur

ing

LA

U2

usin

g R

OL

EM

X a

nd

capt

ured

on

RO

LE

.

PM

C:

The

team

lead

er h

as d

efau

lt r

espo

nsib

ility

for

run

ning

the

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

(W

EE

K)

but

som

etim

es d

eleg

ates

this

to a

team

mem

ber,

suc

h as

the

plan

ning

man

ager

. Tea

m m

embe

rs a

re

resp

onsi

ble

for

repo

rtin

g th

eir

own

data

and

rep

ortin

g to

the

team

acc

ordi

ng to

thei

r ro

le a

ssig

nmen

ts

and

on s

tatu

s, g

oals

, and

ris

ks a

s as

sign

ed.

RSK

M:

Ris

k tr

acki

ng a

nd d

evel

opm

ent o

f m

itig

atio

n pl

ans

gene

rally

is a

ssig

ned

by r

ole

or a

rea

of

expe

rtis

e.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

59

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as a

nd O

bser

vatio

ns

Rat

ing

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

GP

2.5

. Tra

in th

e pe

ople

per

form

ing

or

supp

ortin

g th

e pr

oces

s as

nee

ded.

Oth

er:

All

PSP

and

TSP

trai

ning

All

: T

rain

ing

in P

SP a

nd T

SP

ski

lls

and

prin

cipl

es is

spe

cifi

ed b

y th

e T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

sequ

ence

for

each

rol

e in

the

chai

n of

com

man

d, p

lus

the

PSP

inst

ruct

ors

and

TSP

coa

ches

. PR

EP

L a

nd P

RE

PR

incl

ude

spec

ific

che

cks

that

the

trai

ning

has

bee

n ac

com

plis

hed.

Tea

m m

embe

rs a

re r

espo

nsib

le f

or

ensu

ring

that

they

hav

e “t

he e

duca

tion

and

trai

ning

nee

ded

to d

o su

peri

or w

ork.

”

QP

M:

The

mid

-ter

m r

epor

t in

PSP

trai

ning

req

uire

s th

at s

tude

nts

anal

yze

thei

r ow

n pr

oces

ses,

set

quan

tifia

ble

goal

s, a

nd s

ay h

ow th

ey in

tend

to a

chie

ve th

ose

goal

s in

the

seco

nd h

alf

of th

e tr

aini

ng.

The

fin

al r

epor

t ana

lyze

s se

cond

-hal

f re

sult

s, c

ompa

res

them

aga

inst

the

mid

-ter

m g

oals

, and

set

s

new

goa

ls a

nd p

lans

for

per

sona

l im

prov

emen

t goi

ng f

orw

ard.

D

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts,

WE

EK

, man

y

othe

r sc

ript

s

For

ms:

MT

G,

WE

EK

Rol

es: P

lann

ing

and

supp

ort

man

ager

s

GP

2.6

. Pla

ce d

esig

nate

d w

ork

prod

ucts

of

the

proc

ess

unde

r ap

prop

riat

e le

vels

of

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t.

Oth

er:

NO

TE

BO

OK

All

: P

lans

dev

elop

ed d

urin

g th

e la

unch

and

upd

ated

wee

kly

(esp

ecia

lly

the

cons

olid

ated

wor

kboo

k),

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

min

utes

, and

num

erou

s ot

her

arti

fact

s sp

ecif

ied

thro

ugho

ut th

e T

SP s

crip

ts a

re

plac

ed in

the

proj

ect N

OT

EB

OO

K b

y th

e pl

anni

ng m

anag

er. T

he o

ffic

ial f

orm

of

the

NO

TE

BO

OK

(e.g

., ha

rd c

opy

or e

lect

roni

c) a

nd th

e le

vel o

f co

nfig

urat

ion

man

agem

ent i

t is

subj

ect t

o is

up

to th

e

team

and

/or

orga

niza

tion

. In

gene

ral,

the

supp

ort m

anag

er is

res

pons

ible

for

mat

ters

invo

lvin

g

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t.

S

GP

2.7

. Ide

ntif

y an

d in

volv

e th

e re

leva

nt

stak

ehol

ders

as

plan

ned.

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, P

M,

ST

AT

US

All

: T

he la

unch

pre

para

tion

scri

pts

(PR

EP

L, P

RE

PR

) an

d ot

her

guid

ance

cal

l out

sen

ior

man

agem

ent

and

mar

keti

ng s

peci

fica

lly

as r

elev

ant s

take

hold

ers.

Eac

h of

the

laun

ch s

crip

ts c

alls

for

par

ticip

atio

n

by r

ole.

Scr

ipt P

M c

alls

for

obt

aini

ng s

take

hold

er e

valu

atio

ns a

s pa

rt o

f a

fina

l pro

ject

pos

tmor

tem

.

S

60

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as a

nd O

bser

vatio

ns

Rat

ing

Oth

er:

Sen

ior

man

agem

ent

and

mar

keti

ng

prep

arat

ion

guid

elin

es

Scr

ipt S

TA

TU

S c

alls

for

per

iodi

c m

anag

emen

t and

cus

tom

er s

tatu

s m

eeti

ngs.

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts

GP

2.8

. Mon

itor

and

con

trol

the

proc

ess

agai

nst t

he p

lan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

and

take

app

ropr

iate

cor

rect

ive

acti

on.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er

All

: T

he T

SP

laun

ch c

oach

is r

espo

nsib

le f

or f

acil

itat

ing

all a

spec

ts o

f a

laun

ch o

r re

laun

ch.

PM

C:

The

team

lead

er r

uns

the

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

.

S

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts,

PR

EP

L, P

RE

PR

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er

GP

2.9

. Obj

ecti

vely

eva

luat

e ad

here

nce

of

the

proc

ess

agai

nst i

ts p

roce

ss d

escr

ipti

on,

stan

dard

s, a

nd p

roce

dure

s, a

nd a

ddre

ss

nonc

ompl

ianc

e.

Oth

er:

Che

ckpo

int

revi

ew

All

: T

he T

SP

laun

ch c

oach

ens

ures

pro

per

prep

arat

ion

and

exec

utio

n of

laun

ch a

ctiv

itie

s an

d

deve

lops

a c

oach

ing

plan

for

fol

low

ing

the

team

’s p

rogr

ess.

The

coa

chin

g pl

an f

or a

new

team

usua

lly

incl

udes

one

or

mor

e T

SP

che

ckpo

ints

that

eva

luat

e ho

w w

ell t

he te

am a

nd te

am m

embe

rs a

re

gath

erin

g da

ta a

nd m

anag

ing

them

selv

es. C

heck

poin

ts a

lso

prov

ide

indi

vidu

al f

eedb

ack

as d

eem

ed

nece

ssar

y by

the

coac

h. A

ny is

sues

that

can

not b

e sa

tisf

acto

rily

add

ress

ed b

y th

e te

am o

r te

am le

ader

are

elev

ated

to m

anag

emen

t for

fur

ther

act

ion.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U9,

ST

AT

US

GP

2.1

0. R

evie

w th

e ac

tivi

ties

, sta

tus,

and

resu

lts

of th

e pr

oces

s w

ith

high

er le

vel

man

agem

ent a

nd r

esol

ve is

sues

.

Oth

er:

Pla

n

asse

ssm

ent

chec

klis

t,

quar

terl

y re

view

chec

klis

t

All

: A

t LA

U1,

the

TS

P c

oach

rev

iew

s th

e la

unch

act

ivit

ies

to c

ome

wit

h al

l pre

sent

, inc

ludi

ng

man

agem

ent a

nd m

arke

ting

rep

rese

ntat

ives

. At L

AU

9, th

e te

am le

ader

sum

mar

izes

the

team

’s

plan

ning

act

ivit

ies

and

pres

ents

the

team

’s p

lan

and

poss

ible

alt

erna

tive

pla

ns to

man

agem

ent.

PM

C:

The

team

lead

er a

lso

mak

es r

egul

ar S

TA

TU

S r

epor

ts u

p th

e ch

ain

of c

omm

and

duri

ng th

e

proj

ect a

nd ty

pica

lly

prep

ares

and

del

iver

s th

e te

am’s

inpu

t to

quar

terl

y st

atus

rev

iew

s w

ith

seni

or

man

agem

ent.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

61

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as a

nd O

bser

vatio

ns

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts,

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

All

laun

ch f

orm

s

(esp

. cus

tom

ized

laun

ch M

TG

form

s), W

EE

K,

ST

AT

US

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

GP

3.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

desc

ript

ion

of a

def

ined

pro

cess

.

Oth

er:

All

laun

ch g

uida

nce,

all o

ther

pre

-

laun

ch g

uida

nce

All

: T

he r

efer

ence

d sc

ript

s, f

orm

s, r

ole

desc

ript

ions

, and

oth

er g

uida

nce

take

n to

geth

er a

re a

n

exte

nsiv

e de

scri

ptio

n of

TS

P p

roje

ct m

anag

emen

t pro

cess

es.

S

Scri

pts:

All

indi

vidu

al

laun

ch s

crip

ts,

PM

, WE

EK

GP

3.2

. Col

lect

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, m

easu

res,

mea

sure

men

t res

ults

, and

impr

ovem

ent

info

rmat

ion

deri

ved

from

pla

nnin

g an

d

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

to s

uppo

rt th

e fu

ture

use

and

impr

ovem

ent o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oces

s as

sets

.

For

ms:

MT

G,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

All

: L

aunc

h ar

tifa

cts,

as

spec

ifie

d by

the

laun

ch s

crip

ts, a

nd w

eekl

y m

eeti

ng a

rtif

acts

, as

spec

ifie

d by

the

WE

EK

scr

ipt,

are

stor

ed in

the

proj

ect N

OT

EB

OO

K b

oth

for

use

by th

e pr

ojec

t tea

m a

nd b

y th

e

orga

niza

tion

. At v

ario

us ti

mes

, the

team

lead

er, p

roce

ss m

anag

er, o

r pl

anni

ng m

anag

er is

ass

igne

d

spec

ific

res

pons

ibil

itie

s w

ith

resp

ect t

o co

llec

ting

suc

h in

form

atio

n an

d st

orin

g it

in th

e

NO

TE

BO

OK

.

S

62

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as a

nd O

bser

vatio

ns

Rat

ing

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

and

proc

ess

man

ager

s

Oth

er:

NO

TE

BO

OK

GP

4.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

quan

tita

tive

obje

ctiv

es f

or th

e pr

oces

s th

at a

ddre

ss

qual

ity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

bas

ed o

n

cust

omer

nee

ds a

nd b

usin

ess

obje

ctiv

es.

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts,

esp.

LA

U, R

EL

All

: L

aunc

hes

are

gene

rall

y ex

pect

ed to

last

fou

r da

ys; r

elau

nche

s la

st th

ree

days

. An

expe

cted

dura

tion

rang

e fo

r in

divi

dual

mee

ting

s is

con

tain

ed in

eac

h re

spec

tive

scri

pt, u

sual

ly b

etw

een

one

and

six

hour

s.

PM

C:

Wee

kly

stat

us m

eeti

ngs

are

expe

cted

to la

st a

bout

an

hour

, dep

endi

ng o

n th

e si

ze o

f th

e te

am

and

com

plex

ity

of th

e pr

ojec

t.

S

GP

4.2

. Sta

bili

ze th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f on

e or

mor

e su

bpro

cess

es to

det

erm

ine

the

abil

ity

of th

e pr

oces

s to

ach

ieve

the

esta

blis

hed

quan

titat

ive

qual

ity

and

proc

ess-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves.

A

ll:

Pro

ject

man

agem

ent p

ract

ices

per

se

are

not t

arge

ted

for

quan

titat

ive

man

agem

ent.

N

Scri

pts:

PM

,

LA

UP

M

For

ms:

PIP

GP

5.1

. Ens

ure

cont

inuo

us im

prov

emen

t of

the

proc

ess

in f

ulfi

llin

g th

e re

leva

nt

busi

ness

obj

ecti

ves

of th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss

man

ager

All

: Po

stm

orte

m (

PM

) ac

tivi

ties

can

rai

se is

sues

dea

ling

wit

h an

y pr

oces

s ar

ea. T

he P

IP f

orm

is u

sed

for

capt

urin

g pr

oces

s is

sues

and

pro

pose

d so

lutio

ns f

or a

ny p

roce

ss a

rea.

Typ

ical

ly P

Ms

occu

r an

d

PIP

s ar

e w

ritt

en w

ithi

n th

e co

ntex

t of

a pa

rtic

ular

pro

ject

; how

ever

, the

y ca

n an

d do

add

ress

issu

es in

any

proc

ess

area

, bet

wee

n pr

oces

s ar

eas,

and

eve

n ou

tsid

e th

e sc

ope

of C

MM

I. W

hat T

SP

doe

s no

t

spec

ify

is a

ny k

ind

of s

peci

fic

stan

dard

way

in w

hich

to e

valu

ate

and

act u

pon

PIP

s an

d ot

her

PM

issu

es.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

63

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as a

nd O

bser

vatio

ns

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

PM

,

LA

UP

M

For

ms:

PIP

GP

5.2

. Ide

ntif

y an

d co

rrec

t the

roo

t cau

ses

of d

efec

ts a

nd o

ther

pro

blem

s in

the

proc

ess.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss

man

ager

All

: P

IPs

and

PM

s so

met

imes

hel

p to

iden

tify

roo

t cau

ses

of d

efec

ts o

r ot

her

proc

ess

prob

lem

s. T

he

TE

ST

D s

crip

t, w

hile

usu

ally

use

d in

con

junc

tion

wit

h en

gine

erin

g in

tegr

atio

n an

d te

st a

ctiv

itie

s, h

as

also

bee

n us

ed to

ana

lyze

and

cor

rect

roo

t cau

ses

of d

efec

ts w

ithi

n a

part

icul

ar te

am’s

pro

ject

man

agem

ent p

ract

ices

.

S

64

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

65

7 T

SP

an

d C

MM

I Pro

cess

Man

agem

ent

Pro

cess

Are

as

7.1

Sco

pe

of

PR

OC

ES

S

The

Pro

cess

Man

agem

ent p

roce

ss a

reas

con

tain

the

cros

s-pr

ojec

t act

iviti

es r

elat

ed to

def

inin

g, p

lann

ing,

res

ourc

ing,

dep

loyi

ng, i

mpl

emen

ting

, m

onit

orin

g, c

ontr

olli

ng, a

ppra

isin

g, m

easu

ring

, and

impr

ovin

g pr

oces

ses.

The

pag

e nu

mbe

rs f

or e

ach

proc

ess

area

as

liste

d be

low

are

fro

m C

MM

I:

Gui

deli

nes

for

Pro

cess

Im

prov

emen

t and

Pro

duct

Im

prov

emen

t [C

hris

sis

03].

The

Pro

cess

Man

agem

ent C

ateg

ory

cont

ains

the

follo

win

g pr

oces

s ar

eas.

Org

aniz

atio

nal P

roce

ss F

ocus

pa

ges

323-

340

Org

aniz

atio

nal P

roce

ss D

efin

ition

pa

ges

307-

322

Org

aniz

atio

nal T

rain

ing

page

s 35

5-37

0 O

rgan

izat

iona

l Pro

cess

Per

form

ance

pa

ges

341-

354

Org

aniz

atio

nal I

nnov

atio

n an

d D

eplo

ymen

t pa

ges

287-

306

66

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

7.1.

1 O

rgan

izat

ion

Pro

cess

Fo

cus

(OP

F)

The

Org

aniz

atio

nal P

roce

ss F

ocus

(O

PF)

proc

ess

area

hel

ps th

e or

gani

zatio

n to

pla

n an

d im

plem

ent o

rgan

izat

iona

l pro

cess

impr

ovem

ent b

ased

on

an

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

curr

ent s

tren

gths

and

wea

knes

ses

of th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oces

s as

sets

. Can

dida

te im

prov

emen

ts to

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

sses

are

obt

aine

d th

roug

h va

riou

s m

eans

. The

se in

clud

e pr

oces

s im

prov

emen

t pro

posa

ls, m

easu

rem

ent o

f th

e pr

oces

ses,

less

ons

lear

ned

in im

plem

enti

ng th

e pr

oces

ses,

and

res

ults

of

proc

ess

appr

aisa

ls a

nd p

rodu

ct e

valu

atio

n ac

tiviti

es.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Str

engt

hs, w

eakn

esse

s, a

nd

impr

ovem

ent

oppo

rtun

itie

s fo

r th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

sses

are

iden

tifi

ed

peri

odic

ally

and

as

need

ed.

Tra

inin

g: T

SP

Exe

cuti

ve

Sem

inar

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

desc

ript

ion

of th

e pr

oces

s ne

eds

and

obje

ctiv

es f

or th

e

orga

niza

tion

.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

Dur

ing

the

earl

y st

ages

of

intr

oduc

tion

and

espe

cial

ly d

urin

g th

e T

SP E

xecu

tive

Sem

inar

,

orga

niza

tion

al n

eeds

and

obj

ecti

ves

are

brou

ght

to li

ght i

n or

der

to ju

stif

y in

trod

ucti

on o

f th

e

TS

P.

S

Thi

s is

mor

e pr

oper

ly a

n ac

tivi

ty f

or th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s m

anag

emen

t tea

m a

nd

engi

neer

ing

proc

ess

grou

p (E

PG

).

1.2.

App

rais

e th

e pr

oces

s of

the

orga

niza

tion

per

iodi

call

y an

d as

nee

ded

to

mai

ntai

n an

und

erst

andi

ng o

f th

eir

stre

ngth

s

and

wea

knes

ses.

U

Thi

s is

an

acti

vity

for

the

EP

G o

r ou

tsid

e

cons

ulta

nt (

e.g.

, a S

CA

MP

I ap

prai

sal)

.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

67

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

1.3.

Ide

ntif

y im

prov

emen

ts to

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

sses

and

pro

cess

ass

ets.

U

Aga

in, t

his

is a

n ac

tivi

ty f

or th

e E

PG

.

Exa

mpl

es w

ould

be

orga

niza

tion

-lev

el

eval

uati

on o

f P

IPs

subm

itte

d by

the

TS

P

team

s in

an

orga

niza

tion

, or

idea

s gl

eane

d

from

att

endi

ng a

n in

dust

ry c

onfe

renc

e or

read

ing

rele

vant

jour

nals

.

SG2.

Im

prov

emen

ts a

re p

lann

ed a

nd

impl

emen

ted,

org

aniz

atio

nal p

roce

ss

asse

ts a

re d

eplo

yed,

and

pro

cess

-rel

ated

expe

rien

ces

are

inco

rpor

ated

into

the

orga

niza

tion

al p

roce

ss a

sset

s.

2.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

proc

ess

acti

on

plan

s to

add

ress

impr

ovem

ents

to th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

sses

and

pro

cess

ass

ets.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

The

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n st

rate

gy is

an

exam

ple

of a

proc

ess

acti

on p

lan.

Tai

lori

ng th

e st

rate

gy a

s

appr

opri

ate,

and

inte

grat

ing

it w

ith

othe

r pl

ans

that

add

ress

oth

er n

eeds

, is

an e

ssen

tial

ste

p in

build

ing

an o

rgan

izat

iona

l im

prov

emen

t pla

n.

S

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.2.

Im

plem

ent p

roce

ss a

ctio

n pl

ans

acro

ss

the

orga

niza

tion

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

The

intr

oduc

tion

str

ateg

y ca

lls

firs

t for

pil

ot

proj

ects

and

then

for

incr

easi

ngly

bro

ad r

ollo

ut

acro

ss th

e or

gani

zati

on o

n a

proj

ect-

by-p

roje

ct

basi

s.

S

Thi

s an

alys

is a

ssum

es o

rgan

izat

ion-

wid

e

depl

oym

ent o

f P

SP a

nd T

SP a

ccor

ding

to a

vers

ion

of th

e T

SP in

trod

uctio

n st

rate

gy th

at

is ta

ilor

ed to

the

part

icul

ar n

eeds

and

cons

trai

nts

of th

e im

plem

enti

ng

orga

niza

tion

. Wha

t is

mis

sing

her

e is

a

gene

ric

way

to a

ddre

ss is

sues

that

fal

l

outs

ide

the

scop

e of

the

TSP

and

the

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

. Tw

o ob

viou

s

exam

ples

: Wha

t hap

pens

aft

er T

SP

68

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R

Rol

es:

Tea

m

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

2.3.

Dep

loy

orga

niza

tion

al p

roce

ss a

sset

s

acro

ss th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

TS

P la

unch

pre

para

tion

s m

ake

the

base

line

TS

P

asse

ts a

vail

able

to e

ach

team

. Tea

m m

embe

rs a

re

dire

cted

to a

gree

on

whi

ch te

am m

embe

r w

ill

brin

g w

hich

org

aniz

atio

nal p

roce

ss a

sset

s th

at

may

be

avai

labl

e, in

clud

ing

the

orga

niza

tion

’s

defi

ned

proc

ess,

rel

evan

t eng

inee

ring

sta

ndar

ds,

and

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t and

cha

nge

cont

rol p

roce

sses

.

S

Rol

es:

Pro

cess

man

ager

, tea

m

mem

ber

2.4.

Inc

orpo

rate

pro

cess

-rel

ated

wor

k

prod

ucts

, mea

sure

s, a

nd im

prov

emen

t

info

rmat

ion

deri

ved

from

pla

nnin

g an

d

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

into

the

orga

niza

tion

al p

roce

ss a

sset

s.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

Bro

ad r

ollo

ut in

the

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

cal

ls

for

impl

emen

ting

less

ons

lear

ned

from

pil

ots

and

othe

r ea

rly

proj

ects

as

the

rollo

ut p

roce

eds.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

69

7.1.

2 O

rgan

izat

ion

Pro

cess

Def

init

ion

(O

PD

)

The

Org

aniz

atio

nal P

roce

ss D

efin

ition

(O

PD)

proc

ess

area

est

ablis

hes

and

mai

ntai

ns th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

set

of

stan

dard

pro

cess

es a

nd o

ther

ass

ets

base

d on

the

proc

ess

need

s an

d ob

ject

ives

of

the

orga

niza

tion

. The

se o

ther

ass

ets

incl

ude

desc

ript

ions

of

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oces

s el

emen

ts,

desc

ript

ions

of

life-

cycl

e m

odel

s, p

roce

ss ta

ilori

ng g

uide

lines

, pro

cess

-rel

ated

doc

umen

tati

on, a

nd d

ata.

Pro

ject

s ta

ilor

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

to c

reat

e th

eir

defi

ned

proc

esse

s. T

he o

ther

ass

ets

supp

ort t

ailo

ring

as

wel

l as

impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

defi

ned

proc

esse

s.

Exp

erie

nces

and

wor

k pr

oduc

ts f

rom

per

form

ing

thes

e de

fine

d pr

oces

ses,

incl

udin

g m

easu

rem

ent d

ata,

pro

cess

des

crip

tions

, pro

cess

art

ifac

ts, a

nd

less

ons

lear

ned,

are

inco

rpor

ated

as

appr

opri

ate

into

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

and

oth

er a

sset

s.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

A s

et o

f or

gani

zati

onal

pro

cess

asse

ts is

est

ablis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

(OS

SP).

All

TS

P p

roce

ss

elem

ents

list

ed

in S

ecti

on 5

exce

pt f

or S

EI-

only

off

erin

gs

The

TS

P s

ourc

e m

ater

ials

mad

e av

aila

ble

whe

n

the

TS

P is

pro

perl

y li

cens

ed c

onst

itut

e a

maj

orit

y

of a

n op

erat

iona

l OS

SP. T

his

licen

se a

llow

s th

e

orga

niza

tion

to in

corp

orat

e an

d ta

ilor

the

TS

P

mat

eria

ls a

s ne

cess

ary

for

inte

rnal

use

.

S

The

TS

P is

not

a f

ull-

blow

n O

SSP

, nor

doe

s

it a

ttem

pt to

be.

Suc

h an

ent

ity

can

be

crea

ted

only

by

the

orga

niza

tion

itse

lf.

Scri

pts:

DE

V,

MA

INT

For

ms:

ST

RA

T,

SU

MS

, TA

SK

1.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

desc

ript

ions

of

the

life

-cyc

le m

odel

s ap

prov

ed f

or u

se in

the

orga

niza

tion

.

Rol

es:

Pro

cess

man

ager

Scr

ipts

DE

V a

nd M

AIN

T a

re e

xam

ple

life

-cyc

le

desc

ript

ions

for

new

dev

elop

men

t and

mai

nten

ance

act

ivit

ies,

res

pect

ivel

y. I

n m

any

plac

es in

the

stan

dard

PSP

/TS

P tr

aini

ng

mat

eria

ls, t

he p

oint

is m

ade

that

a c

ycli

c li

fe-

cycl

e ap

proa

ch is

pre

ferr

ed. F

orm

s S

TR

AT

and

(to

a le

sser

ext

ent)

SU

MS

doc

umen

t the

team

’s

chos

en s

trat

egy,

wit

h im

plem

enta

tion

det

ails

show

ing

up in

indi

vidu

al a

nd te

am T

AS

K p

lans

.

S

TS

P a

nd th

e pr

ojec

t tea

ms

typi

call

y pr

ovid

e

man

y po

tent

ial m

odel

s du

ring

LA

U3;

how

ever

, app

rovi

ng th

em f

or o

rgan

izat

iona

l

use

is a

n E

PG

and

/or

man

agem

ent f

unct

ion.

70

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

man

ager

1.3.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

tail

orin

g

crit

eria

and

gui

deli

nes

for

the

orga

niza

tion

’s

set o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

.

Oth

er: P

lann

ing

and

qual

ity

guid

elin

es

LA

U3

dire

cts

the

team

to d

efin

e it

s w

orki

ng

proc

esse

s. T

he p

roce

ss m

anag

er o

r ot

her

assi

gned

rol

e m

anag

er(s

) le

ads

the

effo

rt to

docu

men

t the

se p

roce

sses

if th

ey a

re n

ot f

inis

hed

duri

ng th

e la

unch

. How

ever

, the

re is

no

form

al

dire

ctio

n or

cri

teri

a fo

r ta

ilori

ng (

see

note

). T

he

plan

ning

and

qua

lity

gui

deli

nes

subs

titu

te f

or

orga

niza

tion

al b

ench

mar

k da

ta th

at m

ay n

ot e

xist

for

earl

y la

unch

es in

an

orga

niza

tion

.

S

Muc

h of

the

tail

orin

g ex

pert

ise

lies

wit

h th

e

TS

P c

oach

es. F

orm

al c

rite

ria

and

guid

elin

es

for

tail

orin

g an

OSS

P a

re n

ot—

and

argu

ably

can

not b

e—pa

rt o

f th

e T

SP, s

ince

any

prac

tica

l OS

SP

, esp

ecia

lly

its

tail

orin

g

crit

eria

and

gui

deli

nes,

are

uni

que

to a

n

orga

niza

tion

.

Scri

pts:

PM

For

ms:

TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

Rol

es: P

lann

ing,

proc

ess,

qua

lity

,

and

test

man

ager

s

1.4.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s m

easu

rem

ent r

epos

itor

y.

Oth

er:

SU

MM

AR

Y

Raw

dat

a ar

e ca

ptur

ed in

indi

vidu

al a

nd

cons

olid

ated

TSP

wor

kboo

ks f

rom

eac

h pr

ojec

t

team

. At p

ostm

orte

ms,

team

s (u

sual

ly le

d by

one

or m

ore

of th

e re

fere

nced

rol

e m

anag

ers)

cons

olid

ate

this

info

rmat

ion.

The

SU

MM

AR

Y

spec

ific

atio

n li

sts

stan

dard

ana

lyse

s fo

r sc

hedu

le,

reso

urce

s, s

ize,

pro

duct

ivit

y, d

efec

ts, y

ield

,

rati

os, r

ates

, com

pone

nts,

and

pro

cess

.

S

TS

P a

nd th

e pr

ojec

t tea

ms

prov

ide

muc

h of

the

raw

info

rmat

ion,

but

it is

up

to th

e E

PG

or s

imil

ar o

rgan

izat

iona

l gro

up to

per

form

this

fun

ctio

n.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

71

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

All

TS

P

scri

pts

For

ms:

All

TS

P

form

s

Rol

es: A

ll T

SP

role

s

Oth

er:

All

“oth

er”

proc

ess

asse

ts

1.5.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

ss a

sset

libr

ary.

Tra

inin

g:

Intr

oduc

tion

to

Per

sona

l

Pro

cess

, PSP

for

Eng

inee

rs,

TSP

Exe

cuti

ve

Sem

inar

,

Man

agin

g TS

P

Tea

ms

An

assu

mpt

ion

of th

is a

naly

sis

is th

at T

SP is

used

by

all p

roje

ct te

ams

in a

n or

gani

zati

on;

thus

, all

TS

P s

ourc

e do

cum

ents

(in

clud

ing

the

cour

sew

are

avai

labl

e to

SE

I-au

thor

ized

PSP

inst

ruct

ors)

, alo

ng w

ith

team

-pro

duce

d pr

oces

s

asse

ts, c

onst

itut

e a

sign

ific

ant p

art o

f a

de fa

cto

proc

ess

asse

t lib

rary

.

S

See

not

es f

or 1

.4 a

bove

.

72

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

7.1.

3 O

rgan

izat

ion

al T

rain

ing

(O

T)

The

Org

aniz

atio

nal T

rain

ing

proc

ess

area

iden

tifie

s th

e st

rate

gic

trai

ning

nee

ds o

f th

e or

gani

zatio

n as

wel

l as

the

tact

ical

trai

ning

nee

ds th

at a

re

com

mon

acr

oss

proj

ects

and

sup

port

gro

ups.

In

part

icul

ar, t

rain

ing

is d

evel

oped

or

obta

ined

to e

nsur

e th

at te

am m

embe

rs h

ave

the

skill

s re

quir

ed to

pe

rfor

m th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

set

of

stan

dard

pro

cess

es. T

he m

ain

com

pone

nts

of tr

aini

ng in

clud

e a

man

aged

trai

ning

-dev

elop

men

t pro

gram

, do

cum

ente

d pl

ans,

per

sonn

el w

ith a

ppro

pria

te k

now

ledg

e, a

nd m

echa

nism

s fo

r m

easu

ring

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

trai

ning

pro

gram

.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

A t

rain

ing

capa

bilit

y th

at s

uppo

rts

the

orga

niza

tion

’s m

anag

emen

t an

d

tech

nica

l rol

es is

est

ablis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

stra

tegi

c

trai

ning

nee

ds o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Iden

tify

ing

the

need

for

PSP

and

TS

P tr

aini

ng is

stra

tegi

c to

the

orga

niza

tion

impl

emen

ting

TS

P;

how

ever

, the

re is

no

form

al m

echa

nism

for

iden

tify

ing

and

deal

ing

wit

h ot

her

stra

tegi

c

need

s.

S

Str

ateg

ic tr

aini

ng n

eeds

of

the

orga

niza

tion

are

pote

ntia

lly

refl

ecte

d by

the

aggr

egat

e of

team

trai

ning

nee

ds, b

ut a

gain

ther

e is

no

form

al T

SP

mec

hani

sm to

add

ress

thes

e

need

s.

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, L

AU

1

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

1.2.

Det

erm

ine

whi

ch tr

aini

ng n

eeds

are

the

resp

onsi

bili

ty o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on a

nd w

hich

wil

l be

left

to th

e in

divi

dual

pro

ject

or

supp

ort g

roup

.

Oth

er:

Sen

ior

man

agem

ent

disc

ussi

on

guid

elin

es

Sen

ior

man

agem

ent p

repa

rati

on d

oes

not

spec

ific

ally

cal

l for

iden

tify

ing

trai

ning

nee

ds,

but s

uch

cons

ider

atio

ns a

re o

ften

bro

ught

into

the

disc

ussi

on in

LA

U1.

S

The

re is

no

gene

ral m

echa

nism

in th

e T

SP

or th

e in

trod

ucti

on s

trat

egy

for

deal

ing

wit

h

non-

TS

P is

sues

at t

he o

rgan

izat

iona

l lev

el.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

73

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

1.3.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

an

orga

niza

tion

al tr

aini

ng ta

ctic

al p

lan.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

App

ropr

iate

rol

e-ba

sed

trai

ning

in P

SP a

nd T

SP

met

hods

is a

n in

tegr

al c

ompo

nent

of

the

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

. Cus

tom

izin

g th

e ge

neri

c

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

(an

ess

enti

al s

tep

in T

SP

intr

oduc

tion)

cre

ates

an

orga

niza

tion

al tr

aini

ng

plan

sen

siti

ve to

the

need

s of

the

orga

niza

tion

’s

roll

out o

f th

e T

SP

.

S

The

sco

pe o

f th

e or

gani

zati

onal

pla

n

desc

ribe

d he

re o

bvio

usly

cov

ers

only

PSP

and

TSP

, but

doe

s pu

t in

plac

e an

orga

niza

tion

al m

echa

nism

that

can

be

used

for

othe

r tr

aini

ng.

1.4.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

trai

ning

capa

bili

ty to

add

ress

org

aniz

atio

nal t

rain

ing

need

s.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

The

sta

ndar

d in

trod

uctio

n st

rate

gy s

peci

fica

lly

call

s fo

r de

velo

ping

an

inte

rnal

PSP

trai

ning

/TS

P

coac

hing

cap

abil

ity

suit

ed to

the

orga

niza

tion

’s

need

s.

S

The

sco

pe o

f th

e tr

aini

ng c

apac

ity

addr

esse

d

here

add

ress

es o

nly

PSP

and

TSP

trai

ning

,

but a

gain

, an

orga

niza

tiona

l mec

hani

sm is

put i

n pl

ace

for

pote

ntia

l fut

ure

use.

SG2.

Tra

inin

g ne

cess

ary

for

indi

vidu

als

to p

erfo

rm t

heir

rol

es e

ffec

tive

ly is

prov

ided

.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

2.1.

Del

iver

the

trai

ning

fol

low

ing

the

orga

niza

tion

al ta

ctic

al p

lan.

Tra

inin

g: P

SP

Inst

ruct

or

Tra

inin

g, T

SP

Lau

nch

Coa

ch

Tra

inin

g

App

ropr

iate

rol

e-ba

sed

trai

ning

in P

SP a

nd T

SP

met

hods

is a

n in

tegr

al c

ompo

nent

of

the

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

. Cus

tom

izin

g th

e ge

neri

c

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

cre

ates

an

orga

niza

tion

al

trai

ning

pla

n se

nsit

ive

to th

e ne

eds

of th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s r

ollo

ut o

f th

e T

SP.

S

74

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

2.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

reco

rds

of

orga

niza

tion

al tr

aini

ng.

Tra

inin

g: S

EI

trai

ning

rec

ords

Use

of

copy

righ

ted

PSP

and

TSP

trai

ning

mat

eria

ls r

equi

res

inst

ruct

ors

to o

btai

n an

d

tran

smit

trai

ning

dat

a to

the

SE

I.

S

Oth

er:

TS

P

coac

h

obse

rvat

ion

2.3.

Ass

ess

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

orga

niza

tion

’s tr

aini

ng p

rogr

am.

Tra

inin

g: P

SP

Inst

ruct

or

Tra

inin

g, T

SP

Lau

nch

Coa

ch

Tra

inin

g

PSP

ass

ignm

ents

in P

SP fo

r E

ngin

eers

trai

ning

dem

onst

rate

stu

dent

und

erst

andi

ng th

roug

hout

the

cour

se. T

ests

at t

he e

nd o

f P

SP I

nstr

ucto

r

Tra

inin

g an

d T

SP L

aunc

h C

oach

Tra

inin

g

dem

onst

rate

a m

inim

um le

vel o

f un

ders

tand

ing

nece

ssar

y to

ful

fill

thos

e ro

les.

The

TS

P c

oach

obse

rvat

ion

ensu

res

that

can

dida

te c

oach

es c

an

com

pete

ntly

coa

ch a

TS

P la

unch

. Ult

imat

ely,

it

is th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f th

e T

SP

pro

ject

team

s, a

nd

how

eff

ecti

ve th

ey a

re in

app

lyin

g th

e pr

inci

ples

of P

SP a

nd T

SP o

n th

e jo

b, th

at d

eter

min

e th

e

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

PSP

and

TS

P tr

aini

ng.

S

The

re is

no

obje

ctiv

e as

sess

men

t or

eval

uati

on o

f m

anag

emen

t or

non-

soft

war

e

pers

onne

l. T

here

is s

ubje

ctiv

e ev

alua

tion

by

the

inst

ruct

or(s

) du

ring

the

clas

s. A

mor

e

obje

ctiv

e ev

alua

tion

of

effe

ctiv

enes

s is

lim

ited

to P

SP in

stru

ctor

s an

d T

SP c

oach

es.

Eva

luat

ion

of tr

aini

ng b

eyon

d P

SP a

nd T

SP

trai

ning

is b

eyon

d th

e sc

ope

of T

SP

intr

oduc

tion.

In

the

futu

re, S

EI

may

off

er

mor

e ob

ject

ive

eval

uati

on in

the

form

of

cert

ific

atio

n of

PSP

- an

d T

SP-t

rain

ed

indi

vidu

als.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

75

7.1.

4 O

rgan

izat

ion

al P

roce

ss P

erfo

rman

ce (

OP

P)

The

Org

aniz

atio

nal P

roce

ss P

erfo

rman

ce (

OPP

) pr

oces

s ar

ea d

eriv

es q

uant

itativ

e ob

ject

ives

for

qua

lity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

fro

m th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

bus

ines

s ob

ject

ives

. The

org

aniz

atio

n pr

ovid

es p

roje

cts

and

supp

ort g

roup

s w

ith c

omm

on m

easu

res,

pro

cess

per

form

ance

bas

elin

es,

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

mod

els.

The

se a

dditi

onal

org

aniz

atio

nal a

sset

s ai

d in

qua

ntita

tive

pro

ject

man

agem

ent a

nd s

tatis

tica

l man

agem

ent o

f cr

itica

l sub

proc

esse

s fo

r bo

th p

roje

cts

and

supp

ortin

g gr

oups

. The

org

aniz

atio

n an

alyz

es th

e pr

oces

s pe

rfor

man

ce d

ata

colle

cted

fro

m th

ese

defi

ned

proc

esse

s to

dev

elop

a q

uant

itativ

e un

ders

tand

ing

of p

rodu

ct q

ualit

y, s

ervi

ce q

ualit

y, a

nd p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce o

f th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

set o

f st

anda

rd

proc

esse

s.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Bas

elin

es a

nd m

odel

s th

at

char

acte

rize

the

exp

ecte

d pr

oces

s

perf

orm

ance

of

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f

stan

dard

pro

cess

es a

re e

stab

lishe

d an

d

mai

ntai

ned.

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

INS

, TE

ST

x,

WE

EK

For

ms:

SU

MP

,

SUM

Q, W

EE

K

1.1.

Sel

ect t

he p

roce

sses

or

proc

ess

elem

ents

in th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

set

of

stan

dard

pro

cess

es th

at a

re to

be

incl

uded

in

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce

anal

ysis

.

Oth

er:

PSP

for

Eng

inee

rs

trai

ning

By

defa

ult,

TS

P f

ocus

es o

n (a

) ea

rly

defe

ct

rem

oval

in p

erso

nal r

evie

ws

(as

taug

ht in

PSP

trai

ning

) an

d te

am in

spec

tion

s an

d on

how

effe

ctiv

e th

ese

effo

rts

are

as in

dica

ted

by f

ound

defe

ct d

ensi

ties

in th

ose

proc

ess

phas

es a

s

com

pare

d to

test

pha

ses

(see

SU

MP

and

SU

MQ

)

and

(b)

on s

ched

ule

perf

orm

ance

, as

indi

cate

d by

earn

ed v

alue

and

tim

e on

task

(W

EE

K f

orm

).

S

Oth

er p

roce

ss e

lem

ents

of

inte

rest

to th

e

orga

niza

tion

may

be

indi

cate

d du

ring

the

man

agem

ent b

rief

ing

in L

AU

1.

76

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

1.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

defi

niti

ons

of

the

mea

sure

s th

at a

re to

be

incl

uded

in th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce

anal

yses

.

For

ms:

Tea

m

wor

kboo

ks,

ST

AT

US

,

SU

MM

AR

Y

Mea

sure

s us

ed b

y th

e or

gani

zati

on o

ften

do

not

coin

cide

exa

ctly

wit

h th

ose

pred

efin

ed b

y th

e

TS

P, a

lthou

gh th

e ra

w m

easu

res

(tim

e on

task

,

task

com

plet

ion

date

, def

ects

, and

pro

duct

siz

e)

as d

efin

ed b

y T

SP

are

usu

ally

suf

fici

ent t

o

com

pute

indi

cato

rs u

sefu

l to

the

orga

niza

tion

.

S

TS

P c

ompu

ted

met

rics

suc

h as

ear

ned

valu

e, ta

sk h

ours

per

wee

k, te

st d

efec

ts p

er

KL

OC

, rev

iew

rat

es, y

ield

, and

qua

lity

prof

ile

inde

x (Q

PI)

for

com

pone

nts

are

all

cand

idat

e m

etri

cs f

or a

naly

zing

orga

niza

tion

al p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce. T

here

are

lite

rall

y do

zens

of

cand

idat

e de

rive

d

mea

sure

s fr

om P

SP tr

aini

ng a

nd th

e va

riou

s

TS

P a

sset

s th

at m

ight

be

used

by

the

orga

niza

tion

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U1

1.

3. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n qu

antit

ativ

e

obje

ctiv

es f

or q

uali

ty a

nd p

roce

ss

perf

orm

ance

for

the

orga

niza

tion

.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

The

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n st

rate

gy in

clud

es p

lann

ing

to e

stab

lish

qua

ntit

ativ

e ex

pect

atio

ns f

or p

ilot

proj

ects

, typ

ical

ly in

clud

ing

sche

dule

and

cos

t

perf

orm

ance

and

obs

erve

d de

fect

den

sity

at a

spec

ifie

d te

st o

r de

live

ry p

oint

. App

ropr

iate

sum

mar

ies

of th

ese

expe

ctat

ions

are

typi

call

y

prov

ided

to th

e de

velo

pmen

t tea

ms

duri

ng

LA

U1.

S

The

TS

P a

ctiv

itie

s ar

e cl

earl

y do

ne a

t the

proj

ect l

evel

, not

the

orga

niza

tion

al le

vel.

How

ever

, the

intr

oduc

tion

str

ateg

y do

es c

all

for

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f a

qual

ity

poli

cy th

at

ofte

n in

clud

es s

uch

quan

tita

tive

obj

ecti

ves.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

77

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

man

ager

Tra

inin

g: T

SP

Exe

cuti

ve

Sem

inar

1.4.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce

base

line

s.

Oth

er:

Pla

nnin

g

and

qual

ity

guid

elin

es

Exe

rcis

es in

the

TSP

Exe

cuti

ve S

emin

ar f

ocus

on

eval

uati

ng p

oten

tial b

ench

mar

k ca

ndid

ates

and

com

pari

ng s

elec

ted

benc

hmar

ks w

ith

othe

r

proj

ects

. The

pla

nnin

g an

d qu

ality

gui

deli

nes

esta

blis

h de

faul

t pro

cess

per

form

ance

gui

deli

nes.

S

The

ref

eren

ced

exer

cise

s an

d tr

aini

ng m

ay

bette

r ad

dres

s G

P2.

5 fo

r O

PP m

ore

than

for

this

pra

ctic

e.

For

ms:

TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss,

plan

ning

, or

qual

ity

man

ager

1.5.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

mod

els

for

the

orga

niza

tion

’s

set o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

.

Oth

er: P

lann

ing

and

qual

ity

guid

elin

es

The

pla

nnin

g an

d qu

ality

gui

deli

nes,

alo

ng w

ith

the

perf

orm

ance

mod

el in

here

nt in

the

TSP

wor

kboo

ks, e

stab

lish

a d

efau

lt p

erfo

rman

ce

mod

el.

The

pro

cess

man

ager

, pla

nnin

g m

anag

er,

qual

ity

man

ager

, or

team

lead

er m

onit

ors

team

perf

orm

ance

in li

ght o

f go

als

rela

ted

to th

e

mod

el.

S

Mos

t org

aniz

atio

ns c

usto

miz

e th

e de

faul

t

perf

orm

ance

mod

el im

plie

d by

the

plan

ning

and

qual

ity

guid

elin

es b

ased

on

thei

r ow

n

need

s an

d si

tuat

ion.

78

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

7.1.

5 O

rgan

izat

ion

al In

no

vati

on

an

d D

eplo

ymen

t (O

ID)

The

Org

aniz

atio

nal I

nnov

atio

n an

d D

eplo

ymen

t (O

ID)

proc

ess

area

sel

ects

and

dep

loys

pro

pose

d in

crem

enta

l and

inno

vati

ve im

prov

emen

ts th

at

addr

ess

the

orga

niza

tion’

s ab

ility

to m

eet i

ts q

ualit

y an

d pr

oces

s pe

rfor

man

ce o

bjec

tive

s. T

he id

entif

icat

ion

of p

rom

isin

g in

crem

enta

l and

inno

vativ

e im

prov

emen

ts s

houl

d in

volv

e th

e pa

rtic

ipat

ion

of a

n em

pow

ered

wor

kfor

ce a

ligne

d w

ith th

e bu

sine

ss v

alue

s an

d ob

ject

ives

of

the

orga

niza

tion

. The

se

lect

ion

of im

prov

emen

ts to

dep

loy

is b

ased

on

a qu

antit

ativ

e un

ders

tand

ing

of th

e po

tent

ial b

enef

its a

nd c

osts

fro

m d

eplo

ying

can

dida

te

impr

ovem

ents

and

the

avai

labl

e fu

ndin

g fo

r su

ch d

eplo

ymen

t.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Pro

cess

and

tec

hnol

ogy

impr

ovem

ents

tha

t co

ntri

bute

to

mee

ting

qual

ity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

obje

ctiv

es a

re s

elec

ted.

Scri

pts:

PM

,

LA

UP

M

For

ms:

PIP

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

1.1.

Col

lect

and

ana

lyze

pro

cess

- an

d

tech

nolo

gy-i

mpr

ovem

ent p

ropo

sals

.

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

man

ager

PIP

for

ms

reco

rd b

oth

proc

ess

and

tech

nolo

gy

impr

ovem

ent s

ugge

stio

ns. T

he p

roce

ss m

anag

er

man

ages

the

elic

itat

ion,

gat

heri

ng, r

ecor

ding

,

trac

king

, and

han

dlin

g of

the

team

’s P

IPs

duri

ng

post

mor

tem

s an

d as

nee

ded

duri

ng th

e pr

ojec

t.

S

The

TS

P f

ocus

is a

t the

pro

ject

leve

l. T

here

is n

o ex

plic

it m

echa

nism

or

role

in T

SP

for

coll

ecti

ng a

nd a

naly

zing

PIP

s at

the

orga

niza

tion

al le

vel.

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

D,

LA

UP

M, P

M

1.2.

Ide

ntif

y an

d an

alyz

e in

nova

tive

impr

ovem

ents

that

cou

ld in

crea

se th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s q

uali

ty a

nd p

roce

ss

perf

orm

ance

.

For

ms:

PIP

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

Inno

vati

ve im

prov

emen

ts a

re p

oten

tial

ly

iden

tifi

ed o

n P

IP f

orm

s, w

hich

are

sol

icit

ed

duri

ng p

ostm

orte

m m

eeti

ngs.

TE

ST

D p

erfo

rms

an a

naly

sis

of a

ll in

tegr

atio

n, s

yste

m, a

nd

acce

ptan

ce te

st d

efec

ts a

t the

pro

ject

leve

l, an

d

S

The

TS

P f

ocus

is a

t the

pro

ject

leve

l. T

here

is n

o ex

plic

it m

echa

nism

in T

SP

to a

ddre

ss

orga

niza

tion

al-l

evel

qua

lity

and

perf

orm

ance

issu

es. H

owev

er, t

he d

ecis

ion

to u

se T

SP in

dica

tes

a m

echa

nism

, suc

h as

a

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

79

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

ber

can

lead

to id

entif

icat

ion

of p

oten

tial

qua

lity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

impr

ovem

ents

.

new

tech

nolo

gy g

roup

, tha

t add

ress

es th

is

prac

tice

mor

e br

oadl

y.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

man

ager

, oth

er

role

man

ager

s

1.3.

Pilo

t pro

cess

and

tech

nolo

gy

impr

ovem

ents

to s

elec

t whi

ch o

nes

to

impl

emen

t.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

A p

ilot

ing

stra

tegy

is b

uilt

into

the

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

sequ

ence

. LA

U3

prov

ides

a r

eady

oppo

rtun

ity

whe

n de

fini

ng th

e te

am’s

pro

cess

es

to in

corp

orat

e ne

w p

roce

ss a

nd te

chno

logy

impr

ovem

ents

led

by th

e pr

oces

s m

anag

er o

r,

depe

ndin

g on

the

part

icul

ar in

nova

tion

, a m

ore

rele

vant

rol

e m

anag

er.

S

The

re is

no

expl

icit

mec

hani

sm in

the

TSP

intr

oduc

tion

sequ

ence

for

pilo

ting

othe

r

spec

ific

tech

nolo

gies

; how

ever

, TSP

laun

ches

are

oft

en u

sed

as a

mec

hani

sm to

init

iate

pil

ot p

roje

cts

for

the

use

of o

ther

proc

esse

s an

d te

chno

logi

es.

1.4.

Sel

ect p

roce

ss-

and

tech

nolo

gy-

impr

ovem

ent p

ropo

sals

for

dep

loym

ent

acro

ss th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

Les

sons

lear

ned

duri

ng p

ilot a

nd o

ther

ear

ly

proj

ects

dur

ing

TSP

intr

oduc

tion

are

use

d to

mak

e ad

just

men

ts d

urin

g br

oade

r ro

llou

t in

the

orga

niza

tion

.

S

The

re is

no

expl

icit

mec

hani

sm in

the

TSP

intr

oduc

tion

sequ

ence

for

sel

ecti

ng o

ther

impr

ovem

ent p

ropo

sals

; how

ever

,

inte

grat

ing

wit

h (f

or e

xam

ple)

a la

rger

proc

ess

impr

ovem

ent e

ffor

t lik

e C

MM

I or

the

use

of a

noth

er n

ew te

chno

logy

(e.

g.,

UM

L)

is a

com

mon

man

agem

ent g

oal g

iven

to T

SP te

ams.

SG2.

Mea

sura

ble

impr

ovem

ents

to

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

sses

and

tec

hnol

ogie

s

are

cont

inua

lly a

nd s

yste

mat

ical

ly

depl

oyed

.

80

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

man

ager

2.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

plan

s fo

r

depl

oyin

g th

e se

lect

ed p

roce

ss a

nd

tech

nolo

gy im

prov

emen

ts.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

The

org

aniz

atio

n’s

cust

omiz

ed T

SP in

trod

uctio

n

plan

des

crib

es s

peci

fic

step

s fo

r de

ploy

ing

the

TS

P a

nd r

elat

ed te

chno

logi

es (

e.g.

, the

TSP

tool

). L

AU

3 an

d th

e pr

oces

s m

anag

er r

ole

prov

ide

mec

hani

sms

for

othe

r im

prov

emen

ts to

be in

trod

uced

at t

he p

roje

ct le

vel.

S

2.2.

Man

age

the

depl

oym

ent o

f th

e se

lect

ed

proc

esse

s an

d te

chno

logy

impr

ovem

ents

.

Oth

er:

ST

AT

US

,

SU

MM

AR

Y,

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

,

quar

terl

y re

view

chec

klis

t

The

intr

oduc

tion

str

ateg

y, s

peci

fica

lly

the

quar

terl

y re

view

s an

d re

gula

r S

TA

TU

S a

nd

SU

MM

AR

Y m

eeti

ngs,

pro

vide

mec

hani

sms

for

man

agin

g T

SP

dep

loym

ent i

n th

e or

gani

zati

on.

To

the

exte

nt th

at o

ther

impr

ovem

ents

are

bei

ng

depl

oyed

on

TS

P te

ams,

thes

e sa

me

mec

hani

sms

may

be

used

for

man

agin

g th

ose

impr

ovem

ents

.

S

Wit

h re

spec

t to

all s

peci

fic

prac

tice

s un

der

goal

SG

2: T

he s

cope

of

the

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

by

defi

niti

on is

TSP

-onl

y. A

wel

l-

man

aged

impl

emen

tati

on s

trat

egy

that

pigg

ybac

ks o

ther

pro

cess

and

tech

nolo

gy

impr

ovem

ents

ont

o (f

or e

xam

ple)

TS

P

proj

ect l

aunc

hes

coul

d fu

lly

impl

emen

t

thes

e pr

acti

ces.

2.3.

Mea

sure

the

effe

cts

for

the

depl

oyed

proc

ess

and

tech

nolo

gy im

prov

emen

ts.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

,

quar

terl

y re

view

chec

klis

t

The

intr

oduc

tion

str

ateg

y ca

lls

for

eval

uati

on o

f

earl

y pi

lot p

roje

ct r

esul

ts (

even

pre

lim

inar

y

resu

lts)

bef

ore

proc

eedi

ng w

ith

broa

d

depl

oym

ent o

f th

e T

SP

. Qua

rter

ly r

evie

ws

are

espe

cial

ly u

sefu

l for

man

agem

ent r

evie

w o

f

depl

oym

ent e

ffec

ts.

S

Org

aniz

atio

n-w

ide

mea

sure

s ar

e no

t

expl

icit

ly id

enti

fied

, alt

houg

h th

ere

are

man

y av

aila

ble

cand

idat

es w

ith

the

TS

P.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

81

7.2

TS

P a

nd

Pro

cess

Man

agem

ent

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

es

At f

irst

gla

nce,

CM

MI

gene

ric

prac

tices

as

appl

ied

to th

e pr

oces

s m

anag

emen

t PA

s se

em to

hav

e lit

tle to

do

wit

h th

e T

SP. H

owev

er th

e as

sum

ptio

ns

mad

e fo

r th

is r

epor

t cas

t the

ent

ire

set o

f T

SP p

roce

ss a

sset

s as

a m

ajor

par

t of

an o

rgan

izat

ion’

s st

anda

rd p

roce

ss, m

akin

g th

e T

SP a

cru

cial

pie

ce o

f an

org

aniz

atio

n’s

larg

er p

roce

ss p

ictu

re. T

he ta

ble

belo

w r

efra

ins

from

mak

ing

any

furt

her

assu

mpt

ions

and

, as

such

, ref

lect

s th

e fa

ct th

at o

nly

the

TSP

intr

oduc

tion

seq

uenc

e de

als

to a

ny g

reat

ext

ent w

ith in

stitu

tiona

lizi

ng p

roce

ss m

anag

emen

t for

the

orga

niza

tion

. The

obs

erva

tions

do,

how

ever

, re

flec

t the

usu

al c

ase

that

it is

the

SEI

or s

ome

othe

r ex

tern

al a

gent

that

oft

en a

cts

as th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

mai

n re

sour

ce f

or d

evel

opin

g ex

pect

atio

ns f

or

and

then

gui

ding

the

intr

oduc

tion

effo

rts,

and

for

hel

ping

to e

valu

ate

resu

lts.

See

App

endi

x B

for

an

alte

rnat

ive

appr

oach

to th

e pr

oces

s m

anag

emen

t PA

s. T

his

appr

oach

mak

es o

ne a

dditi

onal

ass

umpt

ion:

that

PSP

pri

ncip

les

and

TSP

pra

ctic

es a

re u

sed

to p

lan,

exe

cute

, mea

sure

, tra

ck, a

nd c

ontin

uous

ly im

prov

e th

e w

ork

of th

e E

PG a

nd r

elat

ed g

roup

s su

ch a

s ac

tion

team

s or

wor

king

gro

ups.

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e T

SP R

efer

ence

P

roce

ss A

rea:

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

GP

2.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

an

orga

niza

tion

al p

olic

y fo

r pl

anni

ng a

nd

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

A

ll:

Out

of

the

scop

e of

TS

P.

U

GP

2.2

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

plan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

OP

F, O

ID:

The

TS

P in

trod

ucti

on s

trat

egy

is a

n ex

ampl

e of

a p

roce

ss a

ctio

n pl

an. P

lann

ing

for

a

part

icul

ar im

plem

enta

tion

of

the

stra

tegy

pro

babl

y ad

dres

ses

this

pra

ctic

e.

OP

D, O

T, O

PP

: T

he p

lann

ing

for

TS

P in

trod

ucti

on r

equi

res

deci

sion

s ab

out h

ow to

sto

re a

nd m

ake

avai

labl

e T

SP

pro

cess

ass

ets

(OP

D);

who

to tr

ain,

in w

hat c

ours

es, a

nd w

hen

to tr

ain

them

(O

T);

and

wha

t the

qua

ntit

ativ

e go

als

are

for

the

impl

emen

tati

on (

OP

P).

S

GP

2.3

. Pro

vide

res

ourc

es f

or p

erfo

rmin

g

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts,

and

prov

idin

g th

e se

rvic

es o

f th

e pr

oces

s.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

All

: T

he T

SP

coa

ch a

nd P

SP in

stru

ctor

s ar

e re

spon

sibl

e fo

r tr

aini

ng e

xecu

tive

s, m

anag

ers,

team

lead

ers,

and

the

proj

ect t

eam

, and

for

laun

chin

g an

d co

achi

ng th

e pr

ojec

t tea

ms

to s

ucce

ssfu

l

conc

lusi

on. O

ther

res

ourc

es n

eces

sary

for

suc

cess

ful i

ntro

duct

ion

are

iden

tifi

ed d

urin

g pl

anni

ng f

or

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n.

S

82

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e T

SP R

efer

ence

P

roce

ss A

rea:

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

GP

2.4

. Ass

ign

resp

onsi

bili

ty a

nd a

utho

rity

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, a

nd p

rovi

ding

the

serv

ices

of th

e pr

oces

s.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

All

: T

SP c

oach

es a

nd P

SP in

stru

ctor

s ha

ve a

res

pons

ibil

ity to

the

impl

emen

ting

org

aniz

atio

ns a

nd to

the

SE

I to

ens

ure

fide

lity

in tr

aini

ng a

nd im

plem

enta

tion

dur

ing

TSP

intr

oduc

tion

, and

to c

ouns

el

orga

niza

tion

per

sonn

el in

the

appr

opri

ate

usag

es o

f th

e te

chno

logy

. The

org

aniz

atio

n as

sign

s

resp

onsi

bili

ties

and

aut

hori

ty a

s ne

cess

ary

in o

rder

to im

plem

ent t

he s

trat

egy.

S

GP

2.5

. Tra

in th

e pe

ople

per

form

ing

or

supp

ortin

g th

e pr

oces

s as

nee

ded.

Tra

inin

g: P

SP fo

r

Eng

inee

rs, T

SP

Exe

cuti

ve

Sem

inar

,

Man

agin

g TS

P

Tea

ms,

Intr

oduc

tion

to

Per

sona

l Pro

cess

All

: T

he v

ario

us P

SP a

nd T

SP tr

aini

ng c

ours

es a

re s

peci

fied

by

the

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n st

rate

gy. P

SP

for

Eng

inee

rs a

nd I

ntro

duct

ion

to P

erso

nal P

roce

ss in

trod

uce

the

conc

epts

of

a de

fine

d pr

oces

s, a

mea

sure

men

t fra

mew

ork,

ben

chm

arki

ng, p

roce

ss d

efin

itio

n, q

uali

ty m

anag

emen

t, an

d co

ntin

uous

impr

ovem

ent.

The

TSP

Exe

cuti

ve S

emin

ar a

nd M

anag

ing

TSP

Tea

ms

intr

oduc

e co

ncep

ts s

uch

as

orga

niza

tion

al b

ench

mar

ks, d

ata-

driv

en m

anag

emen

t, an

d a

proc

ess

cult

ure.

EP

G m

embe

rs o

ften

atte

nd th

ese

cour

ses

as p

repa

rati

on in

impl

emen

ting

and

sup

port

ing

the

TSP

intr

oduc

tion

acti

viti

es.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

GP

2.6

. Pla

ce d

esig

nate

d w

ork

prod

ucts

of

the

proc

ess

unde

r ap

prop

riat

e le

vels

of

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t.

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

and

supp

ort

man

ager

s

OP

F, O

PD

, OP

P:

The

se P

As

are

not e

xpli

citly

add

ress

ed b

y th

e T

SP

. How

ever

, as

earl

y la

unch

es

typi

call

y ad

dres

s or

gani

zati

onal

ben

chm

arki

ng is

sues

, som

e la

unch

act

ivit

ies

(LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6)

and

foll

ow-t

hrou

gh b

y te

am m

embe

rs d

urin

g pr

ojec

t exe

cuti

on (

TA

SK

, LO

GT

) pr

obab

ly a

pply

. The

proc

ess

man

ager

and

/or

supp

ort m

anag

er a

re u

sual

ly in

volv

ed.

OT

: S

tand

ard

PSP

and

TSP

cou

rse

mat

eria

ls a

re m

aint

aine

d an

d m

ade

avai

labl

e to

impl

emen

ting

orga

niza

tion

s by

the

SE

I.

S

GP

2.7

. Ide

ntif

y an

d in

volv

e th

e re

leva

nt

stak

ehol

ders

as

plan

ned.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

sequ

ence

All

: P

art o

f pl

anni

ng a

suc

cess

ful i

ntro

duct

ion

of th

e T

SP in

clud

es id

enti

fica

tion

and

invo

lvem

ent o

f

wil

ling

man

ager

s of

pil

ot p

roje

cts,

ear

ly p

roje

ct te

am m

embe

rs, a

nd a

ffec

ted

supp

ortin

g gr

oups

suc

h

as te

st, q

uali

ty a

ssur

ance

, and

trai

ning

.

S

GP

2.8

. Mon

itor

and

con

trol

the

proc

ess

agai

nst t

he p

lan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

and

take

app

ropr

iate

cor

rect

ive

acti

on.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

, qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

All

: T

he s

tatu

s of

PSP

and

TS

P tr

aini

ng, a

nd o

f T

SP

pro

ject

s (e

spec

iall

y pi

lot p

roje

cts)

is a

ddre

ssed

at p

lann

ed p

oint

s du

ring

the

intr

oduc

tion

acti

viti

es, a

nd u

sual

ly th

erea

fter

at r

egul

ar m

anag

emen

t

mee

ting

s su

ch a

s qu

arte

rly

revi

ews.

Qua

ntit

ativ

e co

mpa

riso

ns b

etw

een

TS

P p

roje

cts

and

wit

h

resp

ect t

o pr

ior

proj

ects

are

typi

cal.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

83

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e T

SP R

efer

ence

P

roce

ss A

rea:

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

GP

2.9

. Obj

ecti

vely

eva

luat

e ad

here

nce

of

the

proc

ess

agai

nst i

ts p

roce

ss d

escr

ipti

on,

stan

dard

s, a

nd p

roce

dure

s, a

nd a

ddre

ss

nonc

ompl

ianc

e.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

All

: O

nce

a fe

w p

ilot

pro

ject

s ar

e un

derw

ay a

nd r

unni

ng r

easo

nabl

y w

ell,

the

TS

P c

oach

(es

peci

ally

an e

xter

nal c

oach

) of

ten

play

s m

ore

a qu

alit

y as

sura

nce

role

to th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

pro

cess

impr

ovem

ent e

ffor

ts.

S

GP

2.1

0. R

evie

w th

e ac

tivi

ties

, sta

tus,

and

resu

lts

of th

e pr

oces

s w

ith

high

er le

vel

man

agem

ent a

nd r

esol

ve is

sues

.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

All

: R

egul

ar e

valu

atio

ns o

f in

trod

ucti

on a

ctiv

itie

s ar

e ty

pica

lly

deli

vere

d to

spo

nsor

ing

man

agem

ent

by th

e T

SP

coa

ch, i

nclu

ding

trai

ning

sta

tus,

pil

ot s

tatu

s, a

nd b

ench

mar

k co

mpa

riso

ns.

S

GP

3.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

desc

ript

ion

of a

def

ined

pro

cess

.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

All

: T

he T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

str

ateg

y is

a d

efin

ed p

roce

ss f

or in

trod

ucin

g a

part

icul

ar s

et o

f di

scip

lined

deve

lopm

ent p

ract

ices

.

S

GP

3.2

. Col

lect

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, m

easu

res,

mea

sure

men

t res

ults

, and

impr

ovem

ent

info

rmat

ion

deri

ved

from

pla

nnin

g an

d

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

to s

uppo

rt th

e fu

ture

use

and

impr

ovem

ent o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oces

s as

sets

.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

All

: E

spec

iall

y in

larg

e, d

istr

ibut

ed o

rgan

izat

ions

, the

less

ons

lear

ned

from

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n at

one

geog

raph

ic s

ite

or e

ven

one

busi

ness

uni

t are

use

d to

info

rm im

plem

enta

tion

at o

ther

sit

es a

nd u

nits

.

S

GP

4.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

quan

tita

tive

obje

ctiv

es f

or th

e pr

oces

s th

at a

ddre

ss

qual

ity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

bas

ed o

n

cust

omer

nee

ds a

nd b

usin

ess

obje

ctiv

es.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

All

: Q

uant

itat

ive

expe

ctat

ions

for

the

TS

P in

trod

ucti

on e

ffor

t are

typi

call

y es

tabl

ishe

d ea

rly

in th

e

sequ

ence

and

info

rm th

e ef

fort

as

it p

roce

eds.

S

84

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e T

SP R

efer

ence

P

roce

ss A

rea:

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

GP

4.2

. Sta

bili

ze th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f on

e or

mor

e su

bpro

cess

es to

det

erm

ine

the

abil

ity

of th

e pr

oces

s to

ach

ieve

the

esta

blis

hed

quan

titat

ive

qual

ity

and

proc

ess-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

All

: T

he T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

str

ateg

y is

des

igne

d to

all

ow m

ost o

rgan

izat

ions

to f

ollo

w a

n ex

pect

ed

impr

ovem

ent p

ath

and

achi

eve

quan

tifi

able

gai

ns in

sch

edul

e ad

here

nce,

cos

t con

tain

men

t, an

d

deli

very

qua

lity

.

S

Scri

pts:

PM

G

P 5

.1. E

nsur

e co

ntin

uous

impr

ovem

ent o

f

the

proc

ess

in f

ulfi

llin

g th

e re

leva

nt

busi

ness

obj

ecti

ves

of th

e or

gani

zati

on.

For

ms:

PIP

All

: A

pos

tmor

tem

, usu

ally

hig

hly

mod

ifie

d fr

om th

e T

SP

scr

ipt,

is ty

pica

lly

held

as

init

ial T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

tran

sitio

ns to

wid

er u

sage

in th

e or

gani

zati

on. L

esso

ns le

arne

d ar

e ty

pica

lly

capt

ured

in

PIP

s an

d us

ed to

mod

ify

the

vari

ous

rele

vant

asp

ects

of

the

intr

oduc

tion

str

ateg

y ap

prop

riat

ely.

S

GP

5.2

. Ide

ntif

y an

d co

rrec

t the

roo

t cau

ses

of d

efec

ts a

nd o

ther

pro

blem

s in

the

proc

ess.

Oth

er:

TE

ST

D

All

: U

nexp

ecte

d pr

oble

ms

in T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

oft

en tr

igge

r a

root

-cau

se a

naly

sis

not d

issi

mil

ar to

the

one

desc

ribe

d in

the

TE

ST

D s

crip

t.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

85

8 T

SP

an

d C

MM

I En

gin

eeri

ng

PA

s

8.1

Sco

pe

of

En

gin

eeri

ng

Pro

cess

Are

as

Eng

inee

ring

pro

cess

are

as c

over

the

deve

lopm

ent a

nd m

aint

enan

ce a

ctiv

itie

s th

at a

re s

hare

d ac

ross

eng

inee

ring

dis

cipl

ines

(e.

g., s

yste

ms

engi

neer

ing

and

soft

war

e en

gine

erin

g). T

he s

ix p

roce

ss a

reas

in th

e E

ngin

eeri

ng p

roce

ss a

rea

cate

gory

hav

e in

here

nt in

terr

elat

ions

hips

. The

se in

terr

elat

ions

hips

st

em f

rom

app

lyin

g a

prod

uct d

evel

opm

ent p

roce

ss, r

athe

r th

an d

isci

plin

e-sp

ecif

ic p

roce

sses

suc

h as

sof

twar

e en

gine

erin

g or

sys

tem

s en

gine

erin

g.

The

pag

e nu

mbe

rs f

or e

ach

PA a

s li

sted

bel

ow a

re f

rom

CM

MI:

Gui

deli

nes

for

Pro

cess

Im

prov

emen

t and

Pro

duct

Im

prov

emen

t [C

hris

sis

03].

The

Eng

inee

ring

pro

cess

cat

egor

y co

ntai

ns th

e fo

llow

ing

proc

ess

area

s.

Req

uire

men

ts M

anag

emen

t pa

ges

485-

496

Req

uire

men

ts D

evel

opm

ent

page

s 46

5-48

4 Te

chni

cal S

olut

ion

page

s 53

3-56

2 Pr

oduc

t Int

egra

tion

page

s 37

1-39

0 V

erif

icat

ion

page

s 57

5-59

0 V

alid

atio

n pa

ges

563-

574

86

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

8.1.

1 R

equ

irem

ents

Man

agem

ent

(RE

QM

)

The

Req

uire

men

ts M

anag

emen

t (R

EQ

M)

proc

ess

area

mai

ntai

ns th

e re

quir

emen

ts. I

t des

crib

es a

ctiv

ities

for

obt

aini

ng a

nd c

ontr

ollin

g re

quir

emen

t ch

ange

s an

d en

suri

ng th

at o

ther

rel

evan

t pla

ns a

nd d

ata

are

kept

cur

rent

. It p

rovi

des

trac

eabi

lity

of r

equi

rem

ents

fro

m c

usto

mer

, to

prod

uct,

to

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

. Req

uire

men

ts M

anag

emen

t ens

ures

that

cha

nges

to r

equi

rem

ents

are

ref

lect

ed in

pro

ject

pla

ns, a

ctiv

ities

, and

wor

k pr

oduc

ts.

Thi

s cy

cle

of c

hang

es m

ay im

pact

all

of th

e ot

her

Eng

inee

ring

pro

cess

are

as; t

hus,

Req

uire

men

ts M

anag

emen

t is

a dy

nam

ic a

nd o

ften

rec

ursi

ve

sequ

ence

of

even

ts. E

stab

lishm

ent a

nd m

aint

enan

ce o

f th

e R

equi

rem

ents

Man

agem

ent p

roce

ss a

rea

is f

unda

men

tal t

o a

cont

rolle

d an

d di

scip

line

d en

gine

erin

g de

sign

pro

cess

.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Pre

para

tion

for

val

idat

ion

is

cond

ucte

d.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

RE

Q, A

NA

,

TE

ST

, TE

ST

1,

TE

ST

2, T

ES

T3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.1.

Sel

ect p

rodu

cts

and

prod

uct

com

pone

nts

to b

e va

lida

ted

and

the

vali

dati

on m

etho

ds th

at w

ill b

e us

ed f

or

each

.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e,

desi

gn, a

nd te

st

man

ager

s

Sys

tem

test

ing

is s

peci

fied

ear

ly in

the

proj

ect

(RE

Q, A

NA

) an

d re

fine

d (T

ES

T, T

ES

T3)

thro

ugho

ut th

e pr

ojec

t. E

arly

bui

ld a

nd

inte

grat

ion

test

s (T

ES

T1,

TE

ST

2) in

corp

orat

e

syst

em te

sts

as a

ppro

pria

te. T

he r

efer

ence

d ro

le

man

ager

s en

sure

that

the

appr

opri

ate

prod

ucts

,

com

pone

nts,

and

met

hods

are

sel

ecte

d an

d

avai

labl

e. S

peci

fic

task

s ap

pear

in in

divi

dual

TA

SK

pla

ns a

nd a

re lo

gged

aga

inst

in L

OG

T

and

LO

GD

.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

87

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.2-

2. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n th

e

envi

ronm

ent n

eede

d to

sup

port

val

idat

ion.

Rol

es: S

uppo

rt,

cust

omer

inte

rfac

e,

desi

gn, a

nd te

st

man

ager

s

The

sup

port

man

ager

has

the

resp

onsi

bili

ty to

ensu

re th

at th

e ve

rifi

cati

on e

nvir

onm

ent i

s

adeq

uate

. LA

U3

has

a sp

ecif

ic s

tep

for

iden

tify

ing

need

ed it

ems

in a

sup

port

pla

n. T

he

othe

r re

fere

nced

rol

e m

anag

ers

com

mun

icat

e

thei

r ne

eds

and

the

enti

re te

am e

nsur

es th

at th

eir

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

sup

port

the

vali

dati

on

effo

rt.

P

No

spec

ific

act

ivit

ies

are

call

ed f

or in

any

of

the

scri

pts

to a

ctua

lly

“est

abli

sh a

nd

mai

ntai

n,”

but i

t is

stro

ngly

impl

ied

by th

e

supp

ort m

anag

er r

ole

desc

ript

ion

and

the

LA

U3

acti

vity

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

RE

Q, A

NA

,

TE

ST

3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.3-

3. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n pr

oced

ures

and

crit

eria

for

val

idat

ion.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e,

supp

ort,

desi

gn,

impl

emen

tati

on,

and

test

man

ager

s

A s

yste

m te

st p

lan

is d

evel

oped

dur

ing

requ

irem

ents

dev

elop

men

t (R

EQ

) or

ana

lysi

s

(AN

A),

ref

ined

, and

ext

ende

d as

nec

essa

ry f

or

syst

em te

st (

TE

ST3)

. The

ref

eren

ced

role

man

ager

s ta

ke r

espo

nsib

ilit

y as

app

ropr

iate

for

the

vari

ous

aspe

cts

of v

alid

atio

n.

D

Spe

cifi

c va

lida

tion

cri

teri

a ar

e no

t cal

led

for

in th

e sc

ript

s bu

t are

typi

call

y id

enti

fied

thro

ugho

ut th

e pr

ojec

t as

appr

opri

ate.

SG2.

The

pro

duct

or

prod

uct

com

pone

nts

are

valid

ated

to

ensu

re t

hat

they

are

sui

tabl

e fo

r us

e in

the

ir in

tend

ed

oper

atin

g en

viro

nmen

t.

88

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

AN

A, T

ES

T1,

TE

ST

2, T

ES

T3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.1.

Per

form

val

idat

ion

on th

e se

lect

ed

prod

ucts

and

pro

duct

com

pone

nts.

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

des

ign,

impl

emen

tati

on,

supp

ort,

and

test

man

ager

s

TE

ST

1 an

d T

ES

T2

aim

spe

cifi

call

y at

val

idat

ing

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

s, w

hile

TE

ST

3 sp

ecif

ies

veri

fyin

g pr

oper

ope

rati

ons

unde

r no

rmal

and

abno

rmal

ope

rati

ng c

ondi

tion

s, p

resu

mab

ly a

s

spec

ifie

d pr

evio

usly

in th

e cu

stom

er’s

val

idat

ed

requ

irem

ents

(R

EQ

, AN

A).

Eac

h ro

le m

anag

er

ensu

res

that

app

ropr

iate

act

ivit

ies

have

bee

n

incl

uded

in in

divi

dual

TA

SK

pla

ns.

D

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

,

TE

ST

1, T

ES

T2,

TE

ST

3, T

ES

TD

,

PM

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

SU

MP

, SU

MQ

2.2.

Ana

lyze

the

resu

lts

of th

e va

lida

tion

acti

viti

es a

nd id

entif

y is

sues

.

Rol

es: P

roce

ss,

qual

ity,

and

test

man

ager

s

The

ref

eren

ced

role

man

ager

s ar

e re

spon

sibl

e fo

r

spec

ific

act

ivit

ies

as in

dica

ted

in th

e sc

ript

s.

SU

MP

, SU

MQ

, and

TA

SK

sum

mar

ize

rele

vant

data

gat

here

d in

LO

GT

and

LO

GD

. All

test

defe

cts

are

attr

ibut

ed to

sou

rce

(pro

duct

or

test

)

and,

if in

the

prod

uct,

furt

her

anal

yzed

usi

ng

TE

ST

D. P

ostm

orte

ms

(PM

) lo

ok s

peci

fica

lly

at

qual

ity

and

othe

r is

sues

rel

ated

to v

alid

atio

n

effo

rts.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

89

8.1.

2 R

equ

irem

ents

Dev

elo

pm

ent

(RD

)

The

Req

uire

men

ts D

evel

opm

ent (

RD

) pr

oces

s ar

ea id

entif

ies

cust

omer

nee

ds a

nd tr

ansl

ates

thes

e ne

eds

into

pro

duct

req

uire

men

ts. T

he s

et o

f pr

oduc

t req

uire

men

ts is

ana

lyze

d to

pro

duce

a h

igh-

leve

l con

cept

ual s

olut

ion.

Thi

s se

t of

requ

irem

ents

is th

en a

lloca

ted

to a

set

of

prod

uct

com

pone

nts.

Oth

er r

equi

rem

ents

that

hel

p to

def

ine

the

prod

uct a

re d

eriv

ed a

nd a

lloca

ted

to p

rodu

ct c

ompo

nent

s. T

his

set o

f pr

oduc

t and

pro

duct

-co

mpo

nent

req

uire

men

ts c

lear

ly d

escr

ibes

the

prod

uct’s

per

form

ance

, des

ign

feat

ures

, ver

ific

atio

n re

quir

emen

ts, e

tc.,

in te

rms

that

the

deve

lope

r un

ders

tand

s an

d us

es.

The

Req

uire

men

ts D

evel

opm

ent p

roce

ss a

rea

supp

lies

requ

irem

ents

to th

e Te

chni

cal S

olut

ion

proc

ess

area

, whe

re th

e re

quir

emen

ts a

re c

onve

rted

in

to th

e pr

oduc

t arc

hite

ctur

e, p

rodu

ct-c

ompo

nent

des

ign,

and

the

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

itse

lf (

e.g.

, cod

ing,

fab

rica

tion)

. Req

uire

men

ts a

re a

lso

supp

lied

to th

e Pr

oduc

t Int

egra

tion

pro

cess

are

a, w

here

pro

duct

com

pone

nts

are

asse

mbl

ed a

nd in

terf

aces

are

ver

ifie

d to

ens

ure

that

they

mee

t the

inte

rfac

e re

quir

emen

ts s

uppl

ied

by R

equi

rem

ents

Dev

elop

men

t.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Sta

keho

lder

nee

ds, e

xpec

tati

ons,

cons

trai

nts,

and

inte

rfac

es a

re c

olle

cted

and

tran

slat

ed in

to c

usto

mer

requ

irem

ents

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

RE

Q, A

NA

1.1-

1(-2

). I

dent

ify

and

coll

ect (

elic

it)

stak

ehol

der

need

s, e

xpec

tati

ons,

con

stra

ints

,

and

inte

rfac

es f

or a

ll p

hase

s of

the

prod

uct

life

cyc

le.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

In L

AU

1, m

arke

ting

or

som

e ot

her

repr

esen

tati

ve

of c

usto

mer

nee

ds p

rese

nts

the

criti

cal p

rodu

ct

requ

irem

ents

. A s

enio

r m

anag

er p

rese

nts

busi

ness

nee

ds, m

anag

emen

t exp

ecta

tion

s, a

nd

D

90

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es:

Cus

tom

er

inte

rfac

e

man

ager

, tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

cons

trai

nts.

Scr

ipts

RE

Q a

nd A

NA

spe

cify

requ

irem

ents

eli

cita

tion

that

may

incl

ude

prot

otyp

es a

nd m

ulti

ple

leve

ls o

f cu

stom

er

inte

ract

ion.

The

cus

tom

er in

terf

ace

man

ager

(an

d

at a

hig

her

leve

l, th

e te

am le

ader

) ar

e re

spon

sibl

e

for

ensu

ring

that

cha

ngin

g cu

stom

er n

eeds

are

addr

esse

d th

roug

hout

the

life

cycl

e.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

AN

A

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.2.

Tra

nsfo

rm s

take

hold

er n

eeds

,

expe

ctat

ions

, con

stra

ints

, and

inte

rfac

es in

to

cust

omer

req

uire

men

ts.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e

man

ager

Scr

ipts

RE

Q a

nd A

NA

spe

cify

cre

atin

g or

upda

ting

a sy

stem

s re

quir

emen

ts s

peci

fica

tion

(SR

S).

RE

Q a

dditi

onal

ly s

peci

fies

a u

ser

man

ual

and

syst

em te

st p

lan,

and

AN

A c

alls

for

an

impa

ct a

naly

sis

wit

h re

spec

t to

an e

xist

ing

syst

em. T

he c

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e m

anag

er is

the

proj

ect t

eam

’s le

ad f

or c

usto

mer

inte

ract

ions

.

D

SG2.

Cus

tom

er r

equi

rem

ents

are

ref

ined

and

elab

orat

ed t

o de

velo

p pr

oduc

t an

d

prod

uct-

com

pone

nt r

equi

rem

ents

.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

HL

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

2.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

prod

uct a

nd

prod

uct-

com

pone

nt r

equi

rem

ents

, whi

ch a

re

base

d on

the

cust

omer

req

uire

men

ts.

Rol

es:

Cus

tom

er

inte

rfac

e

man

ager

Scr

ipt R

EQ

cal

ls f

or c

reat

ion

of a

n en

gine

erin

g

requ

irem

ents

spe

cifi

cati

on (

ER

S).

The

cus

tom

er

inte

rfac

e m

anag

er le

ads

the

team

in th

e

deve

lopm

ent a

nd e

volu

tion

of p

rodu

ct

requ

irem

ents

. Spe

cifi

c ta

sks

typi

call

y ap

pear

in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

and

LO

GT

for

ms.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

91

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

HL

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

2.2.

All

ocat

e th

e re

quir

emen

ts f

or e

ach

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

.

Rol

es: D

esig

n

man

ager

Scr

ipt H

LD

ess

enti

ally

des

crib

es a

pro

cess

for

spec

ifyi

ng p

rodu

ct c

ompo

nent

s an

d al

loca

ting

high

er le

vel r

equi

rem

ents

to th

em. T

he d

esig

n

man

ager

lead

s th

ese

effo

rts

for

the

team

. Spe

cifi

c

task

s ty

pica

lly

appe

ar in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

and

LO

GT

for

ms.

D

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

AN

A, H

LD

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

2.3.

Ide

ntif

y in

terf

ace

requ

irem

ents

.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e an

d

desi

gn m

anag

ers

Scr

ipts

RE

Q a

nd A

NA

add

ress

use

r an

d la

rge

syst

em-l

evel

inte

rfac

es, e

spec

iall

y th

roug

h

prot

otyp

ing.

Scr

ipt H

LD

add

ress

es in

terf

ace

requ

irem

ents

def

init

ion

as p

art o

f a

norm

al

desi

gn p

roce

ss. S

peci

fic

task

s ty

pica

lly

appe

ar in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

and

LO

GT

for

ms.

D

SG3.

The

req

uire

men

ts a

re a

naly

zed

and

valid

ated

, and

a d

efin

itio

n of

req

uire

d

func

tion

alit

y is

dev

elop

ed.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

AN

A

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

oper

atio

nal

conc

epts

and

ass

ocia

ted

scen

ario

s.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e an

d

desi

gn m

anag

ers

The

SR

S, a

s ca

lled

for

by

scri

pts

RE

Q a

nd A

NA

,

is s

peci

fied

to in

clud

e no

rmal

, abn

orm

al, a

nd

reco

very

beh

avio

r an

d pe

rfor

man

ce, a

s w

ell a

s

oper

atio

nal a

nd u

ser

inte

rfac

es. T

he c

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e an

d/or

des

ign

man

ager

typi

call

y le

ads

such

eff

orts

. Spe

cifi

c ta

sks

shou

ld a

ppea

r in

one

or m

ore

task

list

s an

d on

LO

GT

and

, in

the

case

of d

efec

ts f

ound

in a

use

cas

e sc

enar

io, o

n

LO

GD

.

P

The

re a

re n

o de

tail

s fo

r w

hat t

he S

RS

or

user

man

ual s

houl

d co

ntai

n, b

ut s

crip

t IM

P6

call

s fo

r te

stin

g al

l use

cas

e sc

enar

ios,

whi

ch im

plie

s th

at th

ey h

ave

been

cre

ated

prev

ious

ly.

92

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

RE

Q, A

NA

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

a de

fini

tion

of

requ

ired

fun

ctio

nalit

y.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e

man

ager

The

SR

S, a

s ca

lled

for

by

scri

pts

RE

Q a

nd A

NA

,

docu

men

ts th

e re

quir

ed f

unct

iona

lity

of

the

proj

ect,

som

etim

es in

con

junc

tion

wit

h a

user

inte

rfac

e m

anua

l. T

he c

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e

man

ager

typi

call

y le

ads

such

eff

orts

wit

h su

ppor

t

from

the

team

as

nece

ssar

y.

D

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

AN

A, I

NS

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.3.

Ana

lyze

req

uire

men

ts to

ens

ure

that

they

are

nec

essa

ry a

nd s

uffi

cien

t.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e

man

ager

, tea

m

mem

ber

The

RE

Q a

nd A

NA

scr

ipts

ref

er to

use

r

invo

lvem

ent w

ith

prot

otyp

ing

and

both

for

mal

(scr

ipt I

NS)

and

info

rmal

rev

iew

s to

ens

ure

that

the

requ

irem

ents

are

cor

rect

and

com

plet

e. T

he

cust

omer

inte

rfac

e m

anag

er ty

pica

lly

lead

s su

ch

effo

rts

wit

h su

ppor

t fro

m th

e te

am a

s ne

cess

ary.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

RE

Q, A

NA

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.4-

3. A

naly

ze r

equi

rem

ents

to b

alan

ce

stak

ehol

der

need

s an

d co

nstr

aint

s.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e an

d

desi

gn m

anag

er

LA

U1

pres

enta

tion

s no

te c

onst

rain

ts f

rom

bot

h

busi

ness

and

pro

duct

per

spec

tive

s. T

he R

EQ

and

AN

A s

crip

ts c

all f

or d

ocum

enti

ng a

nd v

alid

atin

g

cust

omer

nee

ds w

hile

cap

turi

ng a

nd c

heck

ing

assu

mpt

ions

abo

ut d

esig

n, p

lann

ing,

res

ourc

e,

and

size

ass

umpt

ions

. The

cus

tom

er in

terf

ace

man

ager

or

desi

gn m

anag

er ty

pica

lly

lead

s su

ch

effo

rts

wit

h su

ppor

t fro

m th

e te

am a

s ne

cess

ary.

D

In a

ddit

ion,

the

entir

e la

unch

pro

cess

hel

ps

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er s

take

hold

er n

eeds

can

be m

et w

ithi

n ex

isti

ng c

onst

rain

ts a

nd

prov

ides

alt

erna

tive

s w

hen

they

can

not b

e

met

.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

93

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

AN

A

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.5(

-1)/

(-2)

. Val

idat

e re

quir

emen

ts to

ens

ure

the

resu

ltin

g pr

oduc

t wil

l per

form

(app

ropr

iate

ly in

its

inte

nded

-use

envi

ronm

ent)

/(as

inte

nded

in th

e us

er’s

envi

ronm

ent u

sing

mul

tipl

e te

chni

ques

as

appr

opri

ate)

.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e an

d

desi

gn m

anag

ers

Scr

ipts

RE

Q a

nd A

NA

cal

l for

pro

toty

ping

and/

or s

imul

atin

g “a

ll im

port

ant s

peci

fica

tion

ques

tion

s an

d re

view

[ing

] re

sults

wit

h sy

stem

s,

mar

keti

ng, a

nd th

e cu

stom

er.”

Aga

in, t

he

cust

omer

inte

rfac

e m

anag

er le

ads

requ

irem

ents

effo

rts

for

the

team

. The

cus

tom

er in

terf

ace

man

ager

or

desi

gn m

anag

er ty

pica

lly

lead

s su

ch

effo

rts

wit

h su

ppor

t fro

m th

e te

am a

s ne

cess

ary.

D

94

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

8.1.

3 Te

chn

ical

So

luti

on

(T

S)

The

Tec

hnic

al S

olut

ion

(TS)

pro

cess

are

a de

velo

ps te

chni

cal d

ata

pack

ages

for

the

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

s th

at w

ill b

e us

ed b

y th

e Pr

oduc

t Int

egra

tion

(PI)

and

Sup

plie

r Agr

eem

ent M

anag

emen

t (SA

M)

proc

ess

area

s. T

he e

xam

inat

ion

of a

ltern

ativ

e so

lutio

ns, w

ith

the

inte

nt o

f se

lect

ing

the

optim

um

desi

gn b

ased

on

esta

blis

hed

crite

ria,

is e

xpec

ted.

The

se c

rite

ria

may

be

sign

ific

antly

dif

fere

nt a

cros

s pr

oduc

ts, d

epen

ding

on

prod

uct t

ype,

op

erat

iona

l env

iron

men

t, pe

rfor

man

ce r

equi

rem

ents

, sup

port

req

uire

men

ts, a

nd c

ost o

r de

live

ry s

ched

ules

. The

task

of

sele

ctin

g th

e fi

nal s

olut

ion

mak

es u

se o

f th

e sp

ecif

ic p

ract

ices

in th

e D

ecis

ion

Ana

lysi

s an

d R

esol

utio

n (D

AR

) pr

oces

s ar

ea.

The

Tec

hnic

al S

olut

ion

proc

ess

area

rel

ies

on th

e sp

ecif

ic p

ract

ices

in th

e V

erif

icat

ion

proc

ess

area

to p

erfo

rm d

esig

n ve

rifi

catio

n an

d pe

er r

evie

ws

duri

ng d

esig

n an

d pr

ior

to f

inal

bui

ld.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Pro

duct

or

prod

uct-

com

pone

nt

solu

tion

s ar

e se

lect

ed f

rom

alt

erna

tive

solu

tion

s.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

HL

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.1-

1(-2

). D

evel

op (

deta

iled

) al

tern

ativ

e

solu

tions

and

sel

ecti

on c

rite

ria.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

des

ign

man

ager

Dev

elop

ing

alte

rnat

e so

luti

ons

is o

ne a

spec

t of

high

-lev

el d

esig

n (s

crip

t HL

D).

The

team

lead

er

“cha

llen

ges

the

team

’s a

nd te

am m

embe

rs’

deci

sion

s an

d as

ks w

hat a

lter

nati

ves

they

hav

e

cons

ider

ed.”

The

des

ign

man

ager

has

the

clea

r

resp

onsi

bili

ty to

lead

the

proj

ect’

s de

sign

eff

orts

,

incl

udin

g “u

sing

ana

lyse

s, p

roto

type

s, o

r

expe

rim

ents

as

appr

opri

ate,

” w

ith

prod

uct

perf

orm

ance

and

siz

e ca

lled

out

as

expl

icit

crit

eria

.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

95

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

HL

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.2.

Evo

lve

the

oper

atio

nal c

once

pt,

scen

ario

s, a

nd e

nvir

onm

ents

to d

escr

ibe

the

cond

ition

s, o

pera

ting

mod

es, a

nd o

pera

ting

stat

es s

peci

fic

to e

ach

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e an

d

desi

gn m

anag

ers

RE

Q im

plie

s th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

oper

atio

nal

scen

ario

s w

hen

elic

itin

g re

quir

emen

ts a

nd

docu

men

ts th

em in

a u

ser

man

ual.

HL

D c

alls

for

cycl

ical

dev

elop

men

t and

to “

reas

sess

the

desi

gn,

and

recy

cle

as n

eede

d.”

The

cus

tom

er in

terf

ace

man

ager

(R

EQ

) an

d de

sign

man

ager

(H

LD

) ar

e

resp

onsi

ble

to le

ad th

eir

resp

ecti

ve a

ctiv

itie

s.

Spec

ific

task

s re

flec

ting

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

app

ear

in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

and

LO

GT

for

ms,

and

“def

icie

ncie

s” (

defe

cts)

that

mig

ht d

rive

des

ign

evol

utio

n ar

e lo

gged

in in

divi

dual

LO

GD

for

ms.

D

At t

he in

divi

dual

leve

l, P

SP p

rovi

des

an

Ope

rati

onal

Sce

nari

o te

mpl

ate.

Scri

pts:

HL

D

1.3.

Sel

ect t

he p

rodu

ct-c

ompo

nent

sol

utio

ns

that

bes

t sat

isfy

the

crit

eria

est

abli

shed

. R

oles

: Des

ign

and

impl

emen

tati

on

man

ager

s

HL

D c

alls

for

cyc

lica

l des

ign,

mul

tipl

e le

vels

of

revi

ew, a

nd r

ewor

k of

the

desi

gn a

s ne

cess

ary.

Bot

h th

e de

sign

and

impl

emen

tati

on m

anag

ers

have

dut

ies

to e

nsur

e co

mpl

ianc

e w

ith

perf

orm

ance

and

siz

e cr

iter

ia.

P

Thi

s is

like

ly a

join

t res

pons

ibil

ity b

etw

een

the

team

lead

er, d

esig

n m

anag

er, a

nd

impl

emen

tati

on m

anag

er. I

t is

not c

lear

in

the

scri

pts

whe

n th

is s

elec

ting

a s

olut

ion

mig

ht h

appe

n.

SG2.

Pro

duct

or

prod

uct-

com

pone

nt

desi

gns

are

deve

lope

d.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

HL

D, I

MP

2.1.

Dev

elop

a d

esig

n fo

r th

e pr

oduc

t or

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

The

des

ign

man

ager

lead

s th

e de

velo

pmen

t eff

ort

to d

efin

e ar

chit

ectu

re d

own

to th

e co

mpo

nent

leve

l. Sc

ript

HL

D s

peci

fica

lly

call

s fo

r re

view

ing

requ

irem

ents

and

des

ign

issu

es to

pro

duce

cla

ss

defi

niti

ons,

rel

atio

nshi

ps, a

nd tr

ansi

tion

D

At t

he in

divi

dual

leve

l, th

e P

SP d

esig

n

tem

plat

es p

rovi

de a

com

plet

e de

sign

desc

ript

ion

for

a sm

all s

tand

-alo

ne p

rogr

am.

96

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

des

ign

and

impl

emen

tati

on

man

ager

s

diag

ram

s. S

crip

t IM

P c

alls

for

pro

duci

ng th

e

deta

iled

des

igns

at a

com

pone

nt le

vel.

Eac

h te

am

mem

ber

is r

espo

nsib

le (

as a

ssig

ned

in L

AU

6) f

or

com

plet

ing

com

pone

nt d

esig

ns, w

ith

the

impl

emen

tati

on m

anag

er r

espo

nsib

le f

or d

rivi

ng

the

over

all e

ffor

t.

Scri

pts:

HL

D,

IMP

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.2-

3. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n a

tech

nica

l

data

pac

kage

.

Rol

es: D

esig

n

and

impl

emen

tati

on

man

ager

s

The

des

ign

man

ager

and

impl

emen

tati

on

man

ager

lead

the

deve

lopm

ent e

ffor

ts h

ere,

incl

udin

g es

tabl

ishi

ng te

am s

tand

ards

for

prod

ucin

g an

d do

cum

enti

ng th

e de

sign

. Scr

ipts

call

out

spe

cifi

c ar

tifa

cts.

For

exa

mpl

e, s

crip

t

HL

D s

peci

fies

“st

ruct

ural

des

ign;

dev

elop

men

t

and

test

str

ateg

ies;

inte

rfac

e, d

ata,

and

com

pone

nt s

peci

fica

tion

s” a

nd s

crip

t IM

P c

alls

for

“any

fix

pre

requ

isit

es a

nd c

oreq

uisi

tes”

as

docu

men

ted

in th

e sy

stem

s de

sign

spe

cifi

cati

on

(SD

S)

or s

peci

fied

in th

e de

tail

ed d

esig

n an

d un

it

test

pla

n.

D

The

rel

evan

t par

ts o

f th

e S

DS

, alo

ng w

ith

each

com

pone

nt’s

det

aile

d de

sign

, cod

e,

and

unit

test

pla

n, s

eem

to f

ulfi

ll th

e

desc

ript

ion

of a

tech

nica

l dat

a pa

ckag

e.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

HL

D

2.3-

1. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n th

e so

lutio

n

for

prod

uct-

com

pone

nt in

terf

aces

.

F

orm

s: T

AS

K,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.3-

3. D

esig

n co

mpr

ehen

sive

pro

duct

-

com

pone

nt in

terf

aces

in te

rms

of

esta

blis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned

crit

eria

.

Rol

es: D

esig

n

man

ager

(se

e

note

s)

RE

Q d

escr

ibes

an

ER

S th

at d

ocum

ents

sys

tem

inte

rfac

es (

both

har

dwar

e an

d so

ftw

are)

. HL

D

call

s ou

t the

SD

S, w

hich

doc

umen

ts in

terf

ace

spec

ific

atio

ns. T

he d

esig

n m

anag

er le

ads

all s

uch

acti

viti

es.

D-1

P-3

The

re a

re n

o ex

plic

it r

efer

ence

s ba

ck to

the

crit

eria

, but

the

desi

gn m

anag

er w

ould

like

ly ta

ke th

e le

ad.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

97

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

HL

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.4.

Eva

luat

e w

heth

er th

e pr

oduc

t

com

pone

nts

shou

ld b

e de

velo

ped,

purc

hase

d, o

r re

used

bas

ed o

n es

tabl

ishe

d

crit

eria

. R

oles

: Des

ign

and

supp

ort

man

ager

s

The

sup

port

man

ager

is th

e pr

ojec

t tea

m’s

reu

se

advo

cate

. In

scri

pt H

LD

, the

dev

elop

men

t

stra

tegy

spe

cifi

call

y co

nsid

ers

reus

e.

P

The

des

ign

man

ager

res

pons

ibil

itie

s ar

e

cons

iste

nt w

ith

lead

ing

mak

e-bu

y-re

use

eval

uati

ons.

The

team

lead

er s

houl

d

spec

ific

ally

cha

llen

ge m

ake-

buy-

reus

e

deci

sion

s. N

o sp

ecif

ic g

uida

nce

on

purc

hasi

ng a

s a

desi

gn o

ptio

n is

pro

vide

d.

SG3.

Pro

duct

com

pone

nts,

and

asso

ciat

ed s

uppo

rt d

ocum

enta

tion

, are

impl

emen

ted

from

the

ir d

esig

ns.

Scri

pts:

IM

P

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.1.

Im

plem

ent t

he d

esig

n of

the

prod

uct

com

pone

nts.

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

impl

emen

tati

on

man

ager

The

impl

emen

tati

on m

anag

er is

res

pons

ible

for

lead

ing

the

team

’s im

plem

enta

tion

act

ivit

ies.

Scr

ipt I

MP

spe

cifi

es a

pro

cess

sim

ilar

to P

SP2.

1

for

impl

emen

ting

a g

iven

mod

ule.

Ind

ivid

ual

mod

ules

are

impl

emen

ted

by te

am m

embe

rs, a

s

assi

gned

.

D

At t

he in

divi

dual

leve

l, “o

ut-o

f-th

e-bo

x”

PSP

pra

ctic

es in

clud

e de

tail

ed d

esig

n,

codi

ng, c

ompi

ling

, and

test

of

stan

d-al

one

prog

ram

s.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.2.

Dev

elop

and

mai

ntai

n th

e en

d-us

e

docu

men

tati

on.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e

man

ager

Scr

ipt R

EQ

cal

ls f

or d

evel

opin

g a

deta

iled

use

r

man

ual o

utli

ne a

nd in

itial

dra

ft. T

he c

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e m

anag

er is

res

pons

ible

for

est

abli

shin

g

cust

omer

trai

ning

and

doc

umen

tati

on p

lans

.

D

98

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

8.1.

4 P

rod

uct

Inte

gra

tio

n (

PI)

The

Pro

duct

Int

egra

tion

(PI)

pro

cess

are

a de

scri

bes

gene

rati

ng th

e be

st p

ossi

ble

inte

grat

ion

sequ

ence

, man

agin

g pr

oduc

t com

pone

nt in

terf

aces

, in

tegr

atin

g pr

oduc

t com

pone

nts,

and

del

iver

ing

the

prod

uct t

o th

e cu

stom

er.

Prod

uct I

nteg

ratio

n us

es s

peci

fic

prac

tices

of

both

Ver

ific

atio

n an

d V

alid

atio

n in

impl

emen

ting

the

prod

uct i

nteg

ratio

n pr

oces

s. V

erif

icat

ion

chec

ks

that

the

inte

rfac

es s

atis

fy th

e in

terf

ace

requ

irem

ents

, an

esse

ntia

l eve

nt in

the

inte

grat

ion

proc

ess.

Dur

ing

prod

uct i

nteg

rati

on in

the

oper

atio

nal

envi

ronm

ent,

the

spec

ific

pra

ctic

es o

f th

e V

alid

atio

n pr

oces

s ar

ea a

re u

sed.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Pre

para

tion

for

pro

duct

inte

grat

ion

is c

ondu

cted

.

Scri

pts:

HL

D,

LA

U3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

1.1.

Det

erm

ine

the

prod

uct-

com

pone

nt

inte

grat

ion

sequ

ence

.

Rol

es: D

esig

n

man

ager

Scr

ipt H

LD

cal

ls f

or d

efin

ing

a co

mpo

nent

inte

grat

ion

sequ

ence

and

a te

st s

eque

nce.

In

LA

U3,

the

deve

lopm

ent s

trat

egy

is o

ften

infl

uenc

ed b

y po

tent

ial i

nteg

rati

on s

eque

nce

optio

ns. T

he d

esig

n m

anag

er le

ads

HL

D a

nd

rela

ted

LA

U3

acti

viti

es. S

peci

fic

acti

viti

es

appe

ar in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

and

are

logg

ed

in in

divi

dual

LO

GT

for

ms.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6

1.2-

2. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n th

e

envi

ronm

ent n

eede

d to

sup

port

the

inte

grat

ion

of th

e pr

oduc

t com

pone

nts.

F

orm

s: T

AS

K,

LO

GT

The

sup

port

man

ager

is g

ener

ally

res

pons

ible

for

ensu

ring

the

avai

labi

lity

of

a su

itab

le

deve

lopm

ent a

nd te

st e

nvir

onm

ent.

The

test

man

ager

wou

ld h

elp

to d

efin

e w

hat t

hat

P

Whi

le it

is c

lear

that

the

supp

ort m

anag

er is

resp

onsi

ble,

ther

e is

litt

le g

uida

nce

in th

e

scri

pts

for

actu

ally

est

abli

shin

g an

d

mai

ntai

ning

the

inte

grat

ion

envi

ronm

ent.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

99

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es: T

est a

nd

supp

ort

man

ager

s

envi

ronm

ent i

s be

ginn

ing

in L

AU

3, a

nd c

arry

ing

thro

ugh

LA

U4

and

LA

U6

wit

h sp

ecif

ic ta

skin

g,

capt

ured

in in

divi

dual

TA

SK

pla

ns a

nd lo

gged

in

LO

GT

, to

crea

te a

nd m

aint

ain

the

test

envi

ronm

ent.

Scri

pts:

HL

D,

TE

ST

, TE

ST

2

1.3-

3. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n pr

oced

ures

and

crit

eria

for

inte

grat

ion

of th

e pr

oduc

t

com

pone

nts.

R

oles

: Des

ign

and

test

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

ber

HL

D, T

ES

T, a

nd T

ES

T2

each

add

ress

spe

cifi

c

aspe

cts

of d

evel

opin

g an

d us

ing

the

proc

edur

es

and

crit

eria

for

inte

grat

ing

com

pone

nts

into

the

fina

l pro

duct

. The

des

ign

and

test

man

ager

s ar

e

gene

rall

y re

spon

sibl

e fo

r th

ese

acti

viti

es. T

he

impl

emen

ting

dev

elop

er e

nsur

es th

at th

e

com

pone

nts

are

of h

igh

qual

ity

and

ther

efor

e

read

y fo

r in

tegr

atio

n.

D

SG2.

The

pro

duct

-com

pone

nt in

terf

aces

,

both

inte

rnal

and

ext

erna

l, ar

e

com

pati

ble.

Scri

pts:

HL

D,

INS

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.1.

Rev

iew

inte

rfac

e de

scri

ptio

ns f

or

cove

rage

and

com

plet

enes

s.

Rol

es: D

esig

n

and

test

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

ber

HL

D c

alls

for

a d

esig

n w

alkt

hrou

gh a

nd d

esig

n

insp

ecti

on (

scri

pt I

NS

) of

the

high

-lev

el d

esig

n,

incl

udin

g th

e S

DS

, tha

t inc

lude

s in

terf

ace

spec

ific

atio

ns a

nd in

tegr

atio

n te

st s

eque

nces

.

Spe

cifi

c re

view

act

ivit

ies

appe

ar o

n T

AS

K p

lans

and

LO

GT

for

ms,

and

def

ects

are

logg

ed in

the

prod

ucin

g te

am m

embe

r’s

LO

GD

.

D

100

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

deve

lopm

ent

scri

pts

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.2.

Man

age

inte

rnal

and

ext

erna

l int

erfa

ce

defi

niti

ons,

des

igns

, and

cha

nges

for

prod

ucts

and

pro

duct

com

pone

nts.

Rol

es: S

uppo

rt

and

desi

gn

man

ager

s

The

des

ign

man

ager

is r

espo

nsib

le f

or m

anag

ing

desi

gn c

hang

es, p

rovi

ding

tim

ely

rele

vant

info

rmat

ion

to th

e ch

ange

con

trol

boa

rd (

CC

B),

and

lead

ing

the

proj

ect t

eam

in e

stim

atin

g an

d

docu

men

ting

the

effe

ct o

f de

sign

cha

nges

.

Bas

elin

e up

date

s, in

clud

ing

the

SDS

, are

cal

led

for

freq

uent

ly in

the

deve

lopm

ent s

crip

ts.

D

The

CC

B, f

orm

ed d

urin

g L

AU

3 an

d ch

aire

d

by th

e su

ppor

t man

ager

, sho

uld

prob

ably

revi

ew a

nd a

ppro

ve (

or r

ejec

t) a

ll p

ropo

sed

chan

ges

or b

asel

ine

upda

tes,

but

this

is n

ot

expl

icit

any

whe

re in

the

scri

pts.

SG3.

Ver

ifie

d pr

oduc

t co

mpo

nent

s ar

e

asse

mbl

ed a

nd t

he in

tegr

ated

, ver

ifie

d,

and

valid

ated

pro

duct

is d

eliv

ered

.

Scri

pts:

HL

D,

IMP

, IM

P6,

TE

ST

, TE

ST

1,

TE

ST

2

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.1.

Con

firm

, pri

or to

ass

embl

y, th

at e

ach

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

has

bee

n pr

oper

ly

iden

tifi

ed, f

unct

ions

acc

ordi

ng to

its

desc

ript

ion,

and

that

the

prod

uct-

com

pone

nt

inte

rfac

es c

ompl

y w

ith

the

inte

rfac

e

desc

ript

ions

.

Rol

es: D

esig

n,

impl

emen

tati

on,

test

, and

qua

lity

man

ager

s

The

ref

eren

ced

scri

pts

call

for

mul

tipl

e le

vels

and

type

s of

rev

iew

and

uni

t tes

ting

to e

nsur

e

that

a q

uali

ty p

rodu

ct th

at m

eets

its

desi

gn

spec

ific

atio

ns is

del

iver

ed to

inte

grat

ion

acti

viti

es. P

rodu

ct c

ompo

nent

inte

rfac

es a

re

call

ed o

ut s

peci

fica

lly

for

revi

ew. T

ES

T2

call

s

for

inte

grat

ing

only

hig

h-qu

alit

y co

mpo

nent

s.

The

ref

eren

ced

role

man

ager

s ar

e re

spon

sibl

e fo

r

lead

ing

the

scri

pted

act

ivit

ies,

as

appr

opri

ate.

D

The

pra

ctic

e li

sts

poss

ible

cri

teri

a fo

r

insp

ecti

ons

(scr

ipt I

NS

).

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

10

1

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

2,

HL

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.2.

Ass

embl

e pr

oduc

t com

pone

nts

acco

rdin

g to

the

prod

uct i

nteg

rati

on

sequ

ence

and

ava

ilab

le p

roce

dure

s.

Rol

es: D

esig

n,

impl

emen

tati

on,

supp

ort,

and

test

man

ager

s

TE

ST

2 sp

ecif

ies

deve

lopm

ent a

nd e

xecu

tion

of

a

deta

iled

inte

grat

ion

test

pla

n. T

hese

act

ivit

ies

are

the

resp

onsi

bilit

y of

the

test

man

ager

. Hig

her

leve

l dec

isio

ns a

re m

ade

earl

ier

duri

ng H

LD

, and

are

usua

lly

a de

sign

man

ager

res

pons

ibil

ity.

D

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

2

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.3.

Eva

luat

e as

sem

bled

pro

duct

com

pone

nts

for

inte

rfac

e co

mpa

tibili

ty.

Rol

es: D

esig

n,

impl

emen

tati

on,

and

test

man

ager

s

In T

ES

T2,

inte

grat

ion

test

pla

ns a

re r

evie

wed

to

ensu

re th

at in

terf

aces

are

test

ed u

nder

nor

mal

and

abno

rmal

con

ditio

ns, t

hose

pla

ns a

re th

en

exec

uted

, and

the

resu

ltan

t dat

a ar

e ca

ptur

ed a

nd

anal

yzed

. The

test

man

ager

is g

ener

ally

resp

onsi

ble

for

lead

ing

all s

uch

acti

viti

es.

D

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

,

TE

ST

1, T

ES

T2,

TE

ST

3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.4.

Pac

kage

the

asse

mbl

ed p

rodu

ct o

r

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

and

del

iver

it to

the

appr

opri

ate

cust

omer

.

Rol

es: S

uppo

rt

and

test

man

ager

s

The

TE

ST

1, T

ES

T2,

and

TE

ST

3 (T

ES

Tx)

scri

pts

call

for

ens

urin

g th

at th

e as

sem

bled

prod

ucts

are

rel

ease

d in

to th

e co

nfig

urat

ion

man

agem

ent s

yste

m. S

crip

t TE

ST

seq

uenc

es th

e

TE

ST

x ac

tivi

ties

and

cal

ls f

or r

elea

sing

the

built

prod

uct t

o th

e ne

xt p

arty

in li

ne, w

heth

er in

tern

al

or c

usto

mer

.

D

102

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

8.1.

5 V

erif

icat

ion

(V

ER

)

The

Ver

ific

atio

n (V

ER

) pr

oces

s ar

ea e

nsur

es th

at s

elec

ted

wor

k pr

oduc

ts m

eet t

he s

peci

fied

req

uire

men

ts. T

he V

erif

icat

ion

proc

ess

area

sel

ects

wor

k pr

oduc

ts a

nd v

erif

icat

ion

met

hods

that

will

be

used

to v

erif

y w

ork

prod

ucts

aga

inst

spe

cifi

ed r

equi

rem

ents

. Ver

ific

atio

n is

gen

eral

ly a

n in

crem

enta

l pr

oces

s, s

tart

ing

wit

h pr

oduc

t-co

mpo

nent

s ve

rifi

catio

n an

d us

ually

con

clud

ing

with

ver

ific

atio

n of

ful

ly a

ssem

bled

pro

duct

s.

Ver

ific

atio

n al

so a

ddre

sses

pee

r re

view

s. P

eer

revi

ews

are

a pr

oven

met

hod

for

rem

ovin

g de

fect

s ea

rly

and

prov

ide

valu

able

insi

ght i

nto

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts a

nd p

rodu

ct c

ompo

nent

s be

ing

deve

lope

d an

d m

aint

aine

d.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Pre

para

tion

for

ver

ific

atio

n is

cond

ucte

d.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6,

RE

Q,

AN

A, H

LD

,

IMP

, IN

S

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.1.

Sel

ect t

he w

ork

prod

ucts

to b

e ve

rifi

ed

and

the

veri

fica

tion

met

hods

that

wil

l be

used

for

eac

h.

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

qua

lity

man

ager

Spe

cifi

c ac

tivi

ties

in L

AU

3, L

AU

4, L

AU

5, a

nd

LA

U6

iden

tify

whi

ch p

rodu

cts

wil

l be

insp

ecte

d

or o

ther

wis

e re

view

ed, h

ow m

uch

tim

e w

ill b

e

allo

cate

d, n

umer

ic ta

rget

s fo

r yi

elds

, and

who

wil

l per

form

the

veri

fica

tion

act

ivit

ies.

Spe

cifi

c

prod

ucts

are

cal

led

out i

n th

e de

velo

pmen

t

scri

pts

RE

Q, A

NA

, HL

D, a

nd I

MP

. IN

S is

the

scri

pt f

or in

spec

tions

.

D

PSP

trai

ning

cov

ers

seve

ral s

peci

fic

desi

gn

veri

fica

tion

tech

niqu

es th

at a

re u

sefu

l for

deta

iled

des

ign

insp

ecti

ons.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

10

3

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.2-

2. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n th

e

envi

ronm

ent n

eede

d to

sup

port

ver

ific

atio

n.

Rol

es: D

esig

n,

impl

emen

tati

on,

supp

ort,

and

test

man

ager

s

The

sup

port

man

ager

has

the

resp

onsi

bili

ty to

ensu

re th

at th

e ve

rifi

cati

on e

nvir

onm

ent i

s

adeq

uate

. LA

U3

has

a sp

ecif

ic s

tep

for

iden

tify

ing

need

ed it

ems

in a

sup

port

pla

n.

P

No

spec

ific

act

ivit

ies

are

spec

ifie

d in

any

of

the

scri

pts

to a

ctua

lly

“est

abli

sh a

nd

mai

ntai

n,”

but i

t is

stro

ngly

impl

ied

by th

e

supp

ort m

anag

er r

ole

desc

ript

ion

and

the

LA

U3

acti

vity

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

IMP

6, T

ES

T,

TE

ST

1, T

ES

T2

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.3-

3. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n ve

rifi

cati

on

proc

edur

es a

nd c

rite

ria

for

the

sele

cted

wor

k pr

oduc

ts.

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

and

test

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

ber

The

test

man

ager

is r

espo

nsib

le f

or d

evel

opin

g,

acqu

irin

g, o

r m

aint

aini

ng s

tand

ards

and

proc

edur

es f

or th

e te

st a

ctiv

itie

s in

the

refe

renc

ed

scri

pts.

Ind

ivid

ual e

ngin

eers

are

task

ed to

deve

lop

and

exec

ute

veri

fica

tion

test

s, w

ith

spec

ific

em

phas

is o

n us

er s

cena

rios

, as

wel

l as

logi

c, in

terf

ace,

err

or, v

aria

ble,

dev

ice,

and

oth

er

test

s, a

s ap

prop

riat

e.

D

SG2.

Pee

r re

view

s ar

e pe

rfor

med

on

sele

cted

wor

k pr

oduc

ts.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

AN

A, H

LD

,

IMP

, IN

S

2.1.

Pre

pare

for

pee

r re

view

s of

sel

ecte

d

wor

k pr

oduc

ts.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

Scr

ipts

RE

Q, A

NA

, HL

D, a

nd I

MP

cal

l for

team

insp

ecti

ons

of r

equi

rem

ents

, use

r do

cum

enta

tion

,

high

-lev

el a

nd d

etai

led

desi

gns,

cod

e, a

nd

inte

grat

ion

and

test

pla

ns; a

ll of

thes

e ar

e

plan

ned

for

duri

ng la

unch

es, a

s ap

prop

riat

e. T

he

D

104

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es: Q

uali

ty

man

ager

, tea

m

mem

ber

qual

ity

man

ager

has

spe

cifi

c re

spon

sibi

lity

in

scri

pt I

NS

to e

nsur

e th

at a

qua

lifi

ed m

oder

ator

is

avai

labl

e fo

r th

e in

spec

tion

. In

scri

pt I

NS

, the

mod

erat

or is

res

pons

ible

for

ens

urin

g th

at th

e

wor

k pr

oduc

t is

read

y fo

r in

spec

tion.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

AN

A, H

LD

,

IMP

, IN

S

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.2.

Con

duct

pee

r re

view

s on

sel

ecte

d w

ork

prod

ucts

and

iden

tify

issu

es r

esul

ting

fro

m

the

peer

rev

iew

.

Rol

es: Q

uali

ty

man

ager

, tea

m

mem

ber

Scr

ipts

RE

Q, A

NA

, HL

D, a

nd I

MP

cal

l for

team

insp

ecti

ons

of a

ll le

vels

of

requ

irem

ents

and

spec

ific

atio

ns, u

ser

docu

men

tati

on, h

igh-

leve

l

and

deta

iled

des

igns

, cod

e, a

nd in

tegr

atio

n an

d

test

pla

ns a

t spe

cifi

c po

ints

in th

e de

velo

pmen

t

proc

ess.

Ins

pect

ions

are

con

duct

ed a

ccor

ding

to

scri

pt I

NS.

D

Scri

pts:

IN

S,

PM

For

ms:

IN

S,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

2.3-

2. A

naly

ze d

ata

abou

t pre

para

tion

,

cond

uct,

and

resu

lts

of th

e pe

er r

evie

ws.

Rol

es: Q

uali

ty

man

ager

Scr

ipt I

NS

spe

cifi

es c

olle

ctio

n an

d li

mit

ed

anal

ysis

of

data

on

foun

d de

fect

s to

est

imat

e th

e

num

ber

of d

efec

ts li

kely

rem

aini

ng in

the

prod

uct,

as w

ell a

s re

cord

ing

tim

e sp

ent

prep

arin

g fo

r an

d pe

rfor

min

g th

e in

spec

tion

(al

l

reco

rded

on

form

IN

S a

s w

ell a

s in

divi

dual

TA

SK

, LO

GT

and

LO

GD

for

ms)

. Pha

se a

nd

proj

ect p

ostm

orte

ms

(scr

ipt P

M)

typi

call

y

com

pare

insp

ecti

on a

nd te

st p

hase

dat

a to

dete

rmin

e th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

of th

e in

spec

tion

proc

ess.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

10

5

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG3.

Sel

ecte

d w

ork

prod

ucts

are

ver

ifie

d

agai

nst

thei

r sp

ecif

ied

requ

irem

ents

.

Scri

pts:

IM

P6,

TE

ST

, TE

ST

1,

TE

ST

2, T

ES

T3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.1.

Per

form

ver

ific

atio

n on

the

sele

cted

wor

k pr

oduc

ts.

Rol

es: Q

uali

ty

man

ager

, tea

m

mem

ber

Fro

m u

nit t

est (

IMP

6) th

roug

h th

e va

riou

s

inte

grat

ion

and

syst

em te

sts

(TE

ST

, TE

ST

x),

veri

fica

tion

test

ing

is a

pro

min

ent a

ctiv

ity.

D

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

,

TE

ST

D, P

M

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.2-

2. A

naly

ze th

e re

sult

s of

all

ver

ific

atio

n

acti

viti

es a

nd id

entif

y co

rrec

tive

act

ion.

Rol

es: Q

uali

ty,

proc

ess,

and

supp

ort

man

ager

s, te

am

mem

ber

TE

ST

cal

ls f

or r

evie

w o

f ev

ery

inte

grat

ion

and

test

def

ect u

sing

TE

ST

D. T

he p

ostm

orte

m (

PM

)

anal

yzes

all

ver

ific

atio

n da

ta f

or o

ppor

tuni

ties

to

impr

ove

the

proc

ess

and

futu

re r

esul

ts.

Indi

vidu

al ta

sks

are

capt

ured

on

TA

SK

, and

tim

e

and

defe

cts

are

logg

ed a

s ap

prop

riat

e in

LO

GT

and

LO

GD

.

D

106

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

8.1.

6 V

alid

atio

n (

VA

L)

The

Val

idat

ion

(VA

L)

proc

ess

area

incr

emen

tall

y va

lida

tes

prod

ucts

aga

inst

the

cust

omer

nee

ds. V

alid

atio

n m

ay b

e pe

rfor

med

in th

e op

erat

iona

l en

viro

nmen

t or

a si

mul

ated

ope

ratio

nal e

nvir

onm

ent.

Coo

rdin

atio

n w

ith

the

cust

omer

on

the

valid

atio

n re

quir

emen

ts is

one

of

the

esse

ntia

l ele

men

ts

of th

is p

roce

ss a

rea.

The

sco

pe o

f th

e V

alid

atio

n pr

oces

s ar

ea in

clud

es v

alid

atio

n of

pro

duct

s, p

rodu

ct c

ompo

nent

s, s

elec

ted

inte

rmed

iate

wor

k pr

oces

ses,

and

pro

duct

s.

The

pro

duct

s, p

rodu

ct c

ompo

nent

s, s

elec

ted

inte

rmed

iate

wor

k pr

oduc

t, or

pro

cess

may

req

uire

rev

erif

icat

ion

and

reva

lida

tion.

Iss

ues

disc

over

ed

duri

ng v

alid

atio

n ar

e us

ually

res

olve

d in

the

Req

uire

men

ts D

evel

opm

ent o

r Tec

hnic

al S

olut

ion

proc

ess

area

s.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Pre

para

tion

for

val

idat

ion

is

cond

ucte

d.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

RE

Q, A

NA

,

TE

ST

, TE

ST

1,

TE

ST

2, T

ES

T3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.1.

Sel

ect p

rodu

cts

and

prod

uct

com

pone

nts

to b

e va

lida

ted

and

the

vali

dati

on m

etho

ds th

at w

ill b

e us

ed f

or

each

.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e,

desi

gn, a

nd te

st

man

ager

s

Sys

tem

test

ing

is s

peci

fied

ear

ly in

the

proj

ect

(RE

Q, A

NA

) an

d re

fine

d (T

ES

T, T

ES

T3)

thro

ugho

ut th

e pr

ojec

t. E

arly

bui

ld a

nd

inte

grat

ion

test

s (T

ES

T1,

TE

ST

2) in

corp

orat

e

syst

em te

sts

as a

ppro

pria

te. T

he r

efer

ence

d ro

le

man

ager

s en

sure

that

the

appr

opri

ate

prod

ucts

,

com

pone

nts,

and

met

hods

are

sel

ecte

d an

d

avai

labl

e. S

peci

fic

task

s ap

pear

in in

divi

dual

TA

SK

pla

ns a

nd a

re lo

gged

aga

inst

in L

OG

T

and

LO

GD

.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

10

7

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.2-

2. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n th

e

envi

ronm

ent n

eede

d to

sup

port

val

idat

ion.

Rol

es: S

uppo

rt,

cust

omer

inte

rfac

e,

desi

gn, a

nd te

st

man

ager

s

The

sup

port

man

ager

has

the

resp

onsi

bili

ty to

ensu

re th

at th

e ve

rifi

cati

on e

nvir

onm

ent i

s

adeq

uate

. LA

U3

has

a sp

ecif

ic s

tep

for

iden

tify

ing

need

ed it

ems

in a

sup

port

pla

n. T

he

othe

r re

fere

nced

rol

e m

anag

ers

com

mun

icat

e

thei

r ne

eds

and

the

enti

re te

am e

nsur

es th

at th

eir

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

sup

port

the

vali

dati

on

effo

rt.

P

No

spec

ific

act

ivit

ies

are

call

ed f

or in

any

of

the

scri

pts

to a

ctua

lly

“est

abli

sh a

nd

mai

ntai

n,”

but i

t is

stro

ngly

impl

ied

by th

e

supp

ort m

anag

er r

ole

desc

ript

ion

and

the

LA

U3

acti

vity

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

RE

Q, A

NA

,

TE

ST

3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.3-

3. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n pr

oced

ures

and

crit

eria

for

val

idat

ion.

Rol

es: C

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e,

supp

ort,

desi

gn,

impl

emen

tati

on,

and

test

man

ager

s

A s

yste

m te

st p

lan

is d

evel

oped

dur

ing

requ

irem

ents

dev

elop

men

t (R

EQ

) or

ana

lysi

s

(AN

A),

ref

ined

, and

ext

ende

d as

nec

essa

ry f

or

syst

em te

st (

TE

ST3)

. The

ref

eren

ced

role

man

ager

s ta

ke r

espo

nsib

ilit

y as

app

ropr

iate

for

the

vari

ous

aspe

cts

of v

alid

atio

n.

D

Spe

cifi

c va

lida

tion

cri

teri

a ar

e no

t cal

led

for

in th

e sc

ript

s bu

t are

typi

call

y id

enti

fied

thro

ugho

ut th

e pr

ojec

t as

appr

opri

ate.

SG2.

The

pro

duct

or

prod

uct

com

pone

nts

are

valid

ated

to

ensu

re t

hat

they

are

sui

tabl

e fo

r us

e in

the

ir in

tend

ed

oper

atin

g en

viro

nmen

t.

108

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

AN

A, T

ES

T1,

TE

ST

2, T

ES

T3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.1.

Per

form

val

idat

ion

on th

e se

lect

ed

prod

ucts

and

pro

duct

com

pone

nts.

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

des

ign,

impl

emen

tati

on,

supp

ort,

and

test

man

ager

s

TE

ST

1 an

d T

ES

T2

aim

spe

cifi

call

y at

val

idat

ing

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

s, w

hile

TE

ST

3 sp

ecif

ies

veri

fyin

g pr

oper

ope

rati

ons

unde

r no

rmal

and

abno

rmal

ope

rati

ng c

ondi

tion

s, p

resu

mab

ly a

s

spec

ifie

d pr

evio

usly

in th

e cu

stom

er’s

val

idat

ed

requ

irem

ents

(R

EQ

, AN

A).

Eac

h ro

le m

anag

er

ensu

res

that

app

ropr

iate

act

ivit

ies

have

bee

n

incl

uded

in in

divi

dual

TA

SK

pla

ns.

D

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

,

TE

ST

1, T

ES

T2,

TE

ST

3, T

ES

TD

,

PM

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

SU

MP

, SU

MQ

2.2.

Ana

lyze

the

resu

lts

of th

e va

lida

tion

acti

viti

es a

nd id

entif

y is

sues

.

Rol

es: P

roce

ss,

qual

ity,

and

test

man

ager

s

The

ref

eren

ced

role

man

ager

s ar

e re

spon

sibl

e fo

r

spec

ific

act

ivit

ies

as in

dica

ted

in th

e sc

ript

s.

SU

MP

, SU

MQ

, and

TA

SK

sum

mar

ize

rele

vant

data

gat

here

d in

LO

GT

and

LO

GD

. All

test

defe

cts

are

attr

ibut

ed to

sou

rce

(pro

duct

or

test

)

and,

if in

the

prod

uct,

furt

her

anal

yzed

usi

ng

TE

ST

D. P

ostm

orte

ms

(PM

) lo

ok s

peci

fica

lly

at

qual

ity

and

othe

r is

sues

rel

ated

to v

alid

atio

n

effo

rts.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

10

9

8.2

TS

P a

nd

En

gin

eeri

ng

Cat

ego

ry G

ener

ic P

ract

ices

O

f al

l the

gen

eric

pra

ctic

e gr

oupi

ngs,

non

e is

mor

e co

here

nt th

an th

ose

of th

e en

gine

erin

g PA

s. F

rom

the

view

of

thes

e pr

actic

es, t

here

is r

elat

ivel

y lit

tle to

dis

tingu

ish

betw

een,

for

exa

mpl

e, e

stab

lishi

ng a

nd m

aint

aini

ng a

pla

n fo

r pe

rfor

min

g R

equi

rem

ents

Dev

elop

men

t or

for

that

of

deve

lopi

ng a

Te

chni

cal S

olut

ion.

All

of th

ese

are

sim

ply

part

of

the

life-

cycl

e ac

tivi

ties

bein

g pl

anne

d du

ring

the

typi

cal T

SP la

unch

. Man

y re

al-w

orld

de

velo

pmen

t lif

e cy

cles

trea

t the

ran

ge o

f th

e en

gine

erin

g pr

actic

es a

s a

sing

le c

onti

nuum

, or

at le

ast d

ivid

ed in

a v

ery

diff

eren

t man

ner

than

in

CM

MI,

whe

reas

the

func

tiona

l div

isio

ns o

f C

MM

I ar

e, a

t lea

st in

par

t, a

refl

ectio

n of

a d

esir

e to

kee

p an

y si

ngle

PA

fro

m b

ecom

ing

too

larg

e. F

or

the

purp

oses

of

this

rep

ort,

the

resu

lt is

that

TSP

’s c

over

age

of th

e ge

neri

c pr

actic

es a

s ap

plie

d to

the

engi

neer

ing

PAs

is s

tron

g an

d co

nsis

tent

.

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

GP

2.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

an

orga

niza

tion

al p

olic

y fo

r pl

anni

ng a

nd

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

A

ll E

ngin

eeri

ng P

As:

Org

aniz

atio

nal p

olic

ies

are

beyo

nd th

e sc

ope

of T

SP

. U

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts

GP

2.2

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

plan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

For

ms:

MT

G

form

s

cust

omiz

ed f

or

each

laun

ch

mee

ting

All

: T

he e

ntir

e T

SP la

unch

pro

cess

is d

esig

ned

to f

orm

ulat

e a

deve

lopm

ent p

lan

for

thos

e pa

rts

of th

e

life

cyc

le f

or w

hich

the

asse

mbl

ed te

am h

as r

espo

nsib

ility

. Eac

h in

divi

dual

laun

ch m

eeti

ng s

crip

t

spec

ifie

s a

step

-by-

step

pro

cess

for

pro

duci

ng h

igh-

leve

l pla

ns f

or th

e en

tire

pro

ject

and

det

aile

d

indi

vidu

al p

lans

for

the

next

pha

se o

f th

e w

ork.

Cus

tom

ized

MT

G f

orm

s fo

r ea

ch la

unch

mee

ting

spec

ify

nom

inal

dur

atio

ns f

or e

ach

step

of

the

proc

ess.

S/D

Scri

pts:

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

LA

U8,

LA

U9

For

ms:

RO

LE

GP

2.3

. Pro

vide

res

ourc

es f

or p

erfo

rmin

g

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts,

and

prov

idin

g th

e se

rvic

es o

f th

e pr

oces

s.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

All

: M

anag

emen

t mak

es a

pre

lim

inar

y as

sign

men

t of

reso

urce

s du

ring

laun

ch p

repa

ratio

n by

assi

gnin

g th

e m

embe

rs o

f th

e pr

ojec

t tea

m. D

urin

g th

e la

unch

the

team

det

erm

ines

wha

t res

ourc

es a

re

need

ed to

do

the

wor

k w

ithi

n sp

ecif

ied

cons

trai

nts

(LA

U4,

LA

U6,

LA

U8)

and

if n

eces

sary

neg

otia

tes

wit

h m

anag

emen

t for

the

reso

urce

s ne

eded

to d

o th

e w

ork

prop

erly

(L

AU

9). T

he v

ario

us r

ole

man

ager

s an

d th

e te

am le

ader

pro

vide

the

vari

ous

proc

ess

serv

ices

as

need

ed b

y th

e te

am.

S/D

110

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Oth

er:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R

Scri

pts:

DE

V,

MA

INT

, LA

U2,

LA

U6,

LA

U7

For

ms:

RO

LE

,

GO

AL

, TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

GP

2.4

. Ass

ign

resp

onsi

bili

ty a

nd a

utho

rity

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, a

nd p

rovi

ding

the

serv

ices

of th

e pr

oces

s.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, c

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e,

desi

gn, t

est,

and

impl

emen

tati

on

man

ager

s

All

: T

he te

am le

ader

is a

ssig

ned

duri

ng la

unch

pre

para

tion

s an

d en

sure

s, b

oth

duri

ng th

e la

unch

and

as th

e pr

ojec

t pro

gres

ses,

that

the

righ

t thi

ngs

are

bein

g do

ne b

y th

e ri

ght p

eopl

e at

the

righ

t tim

e.

The

rol

e m

anag

ers

refe

renc

ed a

re s

omet

imes

cal

led

the

“lin

e” r

oles

in T

SP, r

efle

ctin

g co

vera

ge a

cros

s

a no

rmal

eng

inee

ring

life

cyc

le: r

equi

rem

ents

(R

D)

and

requ

irem

ents

man

agem

ent (

RE

QM

)

(cus

tom

er in

terf

ace)

, des

ign

(TS

) in

term

s of

arc

hite

ctur

e an

d hi

gh-l

evel

des

ign,

impl

emen

tati

on (

TS

and

PI)

in te

rms

of d

etai

led

desi

gn a

nd c

odin

g, a

nd te

st (

PI,

VE

R, a

nd V

AL

) as

def

ined

in th

e D

EV

and/

or M

AIN

T s

crip

ts. R

espo

nsib

ilit

ies

for

trac

king

the

team

’s s

tatu

s ag

ains

t its

goa

ls a

re r

ecor

ded

on

form

GO

AL

in L

AU

2. I

ndiv

idua

l wor

k as

sign

men

ts a

re m

ade

duri

ng L

AU

6 an

d re

cord

ed in

the

team

and

indi

vidu

al w

orkb

ooks

. Ris

k-tr

acki

ng r

espo

nsib

iliti

es a

re m

ade

duri

ng L

AU

7.

S/D

GP

2.5

. Tra

in th

e pe

ople

per

form

ing

or

supp

ortin

g th

e pr

oces

s as

nee

ded.

Tra

inin

g: P

SP

for

Eng

inee

rs,

An

Intr

oduc

tion

to P

erso

nal

Pro

cess

,

Man

agin

g TS

P

Tea

ms

All

: T

he te

am le

ader

and

all

team

mem

bers

rec

eive

app

ropr

iate

trai

ning

in P

SP a

nd T

SP te

chni

ques

. S

GP

2.6

. Pla

ce d

esig

nate

d w

ork

prod

ucts

of

the

proc

ess

unde

r ap

prop

riat

e le

vels

of

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t.

Scri

pts:

AN

L,

HL

D, I

MP

,

RE

Q, T

ES

T

All

: T

he r

efer

ence

d sc

ript

s al

l spe

cify

the

crea

tion

or

upda

ting

of b

asel

ines

at c

riti

cal p

oint

s

thro

ugho

ut th

e de

velo

pmen

t pro

cess

and

enc

ompa

ssin

g al

l of

the

engi

neer

ing

PA

act

ivit

ies.

The

supp

ort m

anag

er r

ole

desc

ript

ion

spec

ific

ally

cal

ls f

or th

is p

erso

n to

obt

ain

and

man

age

the

team

’s

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

11

1

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Rol

es: S

uppo

rt

man

ager

, tea

m

lead

er, “

line

”

role

s

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t sys

tem

. The

“li

ne”

role

s (c

usto

mer

inte

rfac

e, d

esig

n, im

plem

enta

tion

, tes

t)

each

hav

e sp

ecif

ic r

espo

nsib

iliti

es to

kee

p it

ems

in th

eir

part

icul

ar a

reas

und

er p

rope

r co

nfig

urat

ion

man

agem

ent.

Scri

pts:

AN

L,

RE

Q, P

M

GP

2.7

. Ide

ntif

y an

d in

volv

e th

e re

leva

nt

stak

ehol

ders

as

plan

ned.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s (e

sp.

cust

omer

inte

rfac

e an

d

test

man

ager

s)

All

: T

he p

roje

ct p

lans

, as

refl

ecte

d in

the

TSP

wor

kboo

ks, t

ypic

ally

incl

ude

invo

lvem

ent b

y in

tern

al

cust

omer

s an

d co

llab

orat

ing

grou

ps a

s ne

cess

ary.

Spe

cifi

c st

akeh

olde

r in

volv

emen

t in

the

deve

lopm

ent s

crip

ts is

foc

used

on

the

fron

t end

of

the

proc

ess,

invo

lvin

g sy

stem

s en

gine

erin

g,

mar

keti

ng, a

nd th

e cu

stom

er. T

he te

am le

ader

, cus

tom

er in

terf

ace

man

ager

, and

test

man

ager

hav

e

spec

ific

res

pons

ibil

itie

s fo

r in

volv

ing

mar

keti

ng, m

anag

emen

t, an

d th

e cu

stom

er a

s ap

prop

riat

e. T

he

othe

r ro

le m

anag

ers

have

mor

e of

an

impl

ied

resp

onsi

bili

ty to

ens

ure

the

invo

lvem

ent o

f ot

her

rele

vant

sta

keho

lder

s as

may

be

nece

ssar

y in

eac

h ro

le’s

are

a of

res

pons

ibil

ity. S

crip

t PM

cal

ls f

or a

stak

ehol

der

surv

ey a

t the

end

of

ever

y pr

ojec

t.

S

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

man

ager

GP

2.8

. Mon

itor

and

con

trol

the

proc

ess

agai

nst t

he p

lan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

and

take

app

ropr

iate

cor

rect

ive

acti

on.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

All

: T

he w

eekl

y te

am m

eeti

ngs

(WE

EK

) m

onit

or th

e ac

tual

eng

inee

ring

act

ivit

ies

agai

nst t

he p

lan

crea

ted

at th

e la

unch

, and

the

team

lead

er r

epor

ts s

tatu

s to

man

agem

ent (

ST

AT

US

and

qua

rter

ly

revi

ews)

. The

pla

nnin

g m

anag

er c

onso

lidat

es th

e in

divi

dual

TSP

wor

kboo

ks in

to a

team

vie

w o

f th

e

proj

ect,

and

also

typi

call

y tr

acks

the

stat

us o

f sc

hedu

le g

oals

and

ris

ks.

S/D

112

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

PM

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss,

qual

ity,

and

supp

ort

man

ager

s

GP

2.9

. Obj

ecti

vely

eva

luat

e ad

here

nce

of

the

proc

ess

agai

nst i

ts p

roce

ss d

escr

ipti

on,

stan

dard

s, a

nd p

roce

dure

s, a

nd a

ddre

ss

nonc

ompl

ianc

e.

Oth

er:

TS

P

chec

kpoi

nt

proc

ess

All

: T

he te

am le

ader

, pro

cess

man

ager

, and

qua

lity

man

ager

mon

itor

var

ious

asp

ects

of

proc

ess

adhe

renc

e. T

he p

ostm

orte

m (

PM

) pr

ovid

es a

n op

port

unit

y fo

r th

e su

ppor

t man

ager

, pro

cess

man

ager

,

qual

ity

man

ager

, and

team

lead

er to

lead

the

team

in a

sses

sing

var

ious

asp

ects

of

its

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

ove

r th

e pr

eced

ing

phas

e or

the

proj

ect a

s a

who

le. A

TS

P c

heck

poin

t is

typi

call

y ru

n by

a qu

alif

ied

TS

P c

oach

to e

valu

ate

the

team

’s a

dher

ence

to it

s ow

n pl

an a

nd p

roce

sses

and

to p

rovi

de

feed

back

and

coa

chin

g in

ord

er to

per

form

bet

ter

on th

e ne

xt p

roje

ct o

r pr

ojec

t cyc

le.

Rol

es:

Pla

nnin

g

man

ager

, tea

m

lead

er

GP

2.1

0. R

evie

w th

e ac

tivi

ties

, sta

tus,

and

resu

lts

of th

e pr

oces

s w

ith

high

er le

vel

man

agem

ent a

nd r

esol

ve is

sues

.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

All

: T

he p

lann

ing

man

ager

con

soli

date

s w

eekl

y te

am d

ata

for

the

team

’s e

valu

atio

n, a

nd th

at d

ata

is

typi

call

y pr

esen

ted

to m

anag

emen

t by

the

team

lead

er a

long

wit

h an

y is

sues

, ris

ks, o

r ot

her

conc

erns

that

may

hav

e ar

isen

sin

ce p

rior

mee

ting

s. I

n ad

ditio

n, q

uart

erly

rev

iew

mee

ting

s w

ith

seni

or

man

agem

ent f

ocus

on

TSP

dat

a fr

om e

very

pro

ject

to e

nsur

e th

at m

anag

emen

t is

kept

info

rmed

and

has

prio

r kn

owle

dge

of w

hen

and

whe

re th

eir

help

mig

ht b

e ne

eded

.

S/D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

11

3

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

All

deve

lopm

ent

scri

pts

GP

3.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

desc

ript

ion

of a

def

ined

pro

cess

.

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

man

ager

, “li

ne”

role

man

ager

s

All

: D

EV

and

MA

INT

des

crib

e fu

ll li

fe c

ycle

s fo

r ne

w d

evel

opm

ent o

r m

aint

enan

ce p

roje

cts

resp

ecti

vely

. The

y re

fere

nce

othe

r de

velo

pmen

t scr

ipts

(se

e be

low

) th

at p

rovi

de m

ore

deta

iled

guid

ance

.

RE

QM

/RD

: S

crip

ts R

EQ

and

AN

A a

re u

sed

for

deve

lopi

ng n

ew r

equi

rem

ents

and

ana

lyzi

ng c

hang

es

to e

xist

ing

ones

and

for

kee

ping

req

uire

men

ts b

asel

ines

cur

rent

.

TS:

Scr

ipts

HL

D a

nd I

MP

gui

de th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

a te

chni

cal s

olut

ion

from

the

requ

irem

ents

deve

lope

d by

RE

Q o

r A

NA

thro

ugh

impl

emen

tati

on a

nd u

nit t

estin

g (I

MP

, IM

P6)

.

PI:

Scr

ipt T

ES

T1

guid

es in

tegr

atio

n of

com

pone

nts

and

fixe

s in

to a

wor

king

sys

tem

.

VE

R:

Scr

ipt T

ES

T (

incl

udin

g th

e re

fere

nced

TE

ST

1, T

ES

T2,

and

TE

ST

3) g

uide

s va

riou

s le

vels

of

veri

fica

tion

test

ing

of th

e sy

stem

. Scr

ipt I

NS

gui

des

form

al te

am in

spec

tion

s.

VA

L:

Scr

ipt T

ES

T3

guid

es s

yste

m-l

evel

test

ing

unde

r bo

th n

orm

al a

nd a

bnor

mal

ope

rati

ng

cond

ition

s.

S/D

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

PM

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

GP

3.2

. Col

lect

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, m

easu

res,

mea

sure

men

t res

ults

, and

impr

ovem

ent

info

rmat

ion

deri

ved

from

pla

nnin

g an

d

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

to s

uppo

rt th

e fu

ture

use

and

impr

ovem

ent o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oces

s as

sets

.

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

All

: T

ime

spen

t and

dat

e co

mpl

eted

for

eac

h ta

sk in

eac

h te

am m

embe

r’s

TS

P w

orkb

ook

is r

ecor

ded.

In a

ddit

ion,

dep

endi

ng o

n th

e sp

ecif

ic ta

sk, d

efec

t and

/or

size

dat

a m

ay a

lso

be r

ecor

ded.

The

wee

kly

team

-wid

e co

nsol

idat

ion

of th

is d

ata

incl

udes

doz

ens

of s

tand

ard

view

s, s

umm

arie

s, a

nd a

naly

ses.

The

se d

ata

are

sum

mar

ized

on

the

WE

EK

for

m a

nd a

t pro

ject

pos

tmor

tem

s (P

M)

so a

s to

be

usef

ul to

the

curr

ent p

roje

ct a

nd o

ther

pro

ject

s. V

ario

us r

ole

man

ager

s ty

pica

lly

focu

s on

one

or

anot

her

aspe

ct

of th

is d

ata

(e.g

., qu

alit

y an

d te

st m

anag

ers

on th

e re

lati

onsh

ip b

etw

een

revi

ew, i

nspe

ctio

n, a

nd te

st

data

on

part

icul

ar c

ompo

nent

s, o

r th

e de

sign

and

impl

emen

tati

on m

anag

ers

on d

esig

n si

ze m

easu

res

and

how

they

rel

ate

to f

inal

pro

duct

siz

e) a

nd m

ake

such

ana

lyse

s av

aila

ble

for

orga

niza

tion

al

lear

ning

.

S/D

114

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

LA

U5,

LA

U6,

PSP

plan

ning

and

PR

OB

E s

crip

ts

For

ms:

TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

qua

lity

man

ager

GP

4.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

quan

tita

tive

obje

ctiv

es f

or th

e pr

oces

s th

at a

ddre

ss

qual

ity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

bas

ed o

n

cust

omer

nee

ds a

nd b

usin

ess

obje

ctiv

es.

Tra

inin

g: P

SP

for

Eng

inee

rs

All

: L

AU

6 di

rect

s te

am m

embe

rs to

mak

e P

SP-l

evel

pla

ns f

or e

ach

com

pone

nt r

eady

for

impl

emen

tati

on, w

hich

incl

udes

set

ting

det

aile

d ta

rget

s fo

r si

ze, o

vera

ll e

ffor

t, ba

lanc

ing

that

eff

ort t

o

prod

uce

a hi

gh-q

uali

ty p

rodu

ct, a

nd d

efec

t den

siti

es in

com

pile

and

test

pha

ses

in o

rder

to v

erif

y hi

gh

qual

ity.

For

oth

er ta

sks

team

mem

bers

bre

ak w

ork

into

sm

all,

man

agea

ble

chun

ks (

10 h

ours

or

less

)

and

then

pro

duce

det

aile

d pe

rson

al a

nd o

vera

ll ta

sk, s

ched

ule,

and

ear

ned

valu

e pl

ans.

In

LA

U5,

the

team

set

s qu

anti

tati

ve q

ualit

y go

als

in te

rms

of d

efec

t den

sity

in te

st p

hase

s, w

hich

are

then

adj

uste

d

as n

eces

sary

in L

AU

6 in

acc

orda

nce

wit

h th

e de

tail

ed p

erso

nal p

lans

.

S/D

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

GP

4.2

. Sta

bili

ze th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f on

e or

mor

e su

bpro

cess

es to

det

erm

ine

the

abil

ity

of th

e pr

oces

s to

ach

ieve

the

esta

blis

hed

quan

titat

ive

qual

ity

and

proc

ess-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

lann

ing

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s

All

: T

he T

SP

mea

sure

men

t fra

mew

ork

and

wee

kly

mon

itor

ing

typi

call

y ch

arac

teri

zes

and

help

s to

stab

iliz

e pr

oces

s pe

rfor

man

ce in

term

s of

nor

mal

ized

wee

kly

effo

rt a

nd d

eliv

ered

def

ect d

ensi

ties

.

The

se d

ata

are

then

use

d to

est

ablis

h fu

ture

exp

ecta

tion

s an

d dr

ive

syst

emat

ic im

prov

emen

t eff

orts

goin

g fo

rwar

d, m

ainl

y vi

a th

e w

eekl

y pr

ojec

t sta

tus

mee

ting

(W

EE

K).

The

team

lead

er, p

lann

ing

man

ager

, and

qua

lity

man

ager

typi

call

y fo

cus

on o

ne o

r an

othe

r as

pect

of

the

data

and

gui

de th

e te

am

to m

eet o

r be

tter

the

plan

s th

at w

ere

mad

e du

ring

the

laun

ch.

S/D

Scri

pts:

PM

,

LA

UP

M

For

ms:

PIP

GP

5.1

. Ens

ure

cont

inuo

us im

prov

emen

t of

the

proc

ess

in f

ulfi

llin

g th

e re

leva

nt

busi

ness

obj

ecti

ves

of th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss

man

ager

All

: Po

stm

orte

m (

PM

) ac

tivi

ties

can

rai

se is

sues

dea

ling

wit

h an

y pr

oces

s ar

ea. T

he P

IP f

orm

is u

sed

for

capt

urin

g pr

oces

s is

sues

and

pro

pose

d so

lutio

ns f

or a

ny p

roce

ss a

rea.

Typ

ical

ly P

Ms

occu

r an

d

PIP

s ar

e w

ritt

en w

ithi

n th

e co

ntex

t of

a pa

rtic

ular

pro

ject

; how

ever

they

can

and

do

addr

ess

issu

es in

any

proc

ess

area

, bet

wee

n pr

oces

s ar

eas,

and

eve

n ou

tsid

e th

e sc

ope

of C

MM

I. W

hat T

SP

doe

s no

t

spec

ify

is a

ny k

ind

of s

peci

fic

stan

dard

way

in w

hich

to e

valu

ate

and

act u

pon

PIP

s an

d ot

her

PM

issu

es.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

11

5

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

D,

PM

, LA

UP

M

For

ms:

PIP

GP

5.2

. Ide

ntif

y an

d co

rrec

t the

roo

t cau

ses

of d

efec

ts a

nd o

ther

pro

blem

s in

the

proc

ess.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss

man

ager

All

: T

he T

ES

T s

crip

t cal

ls f

or e

nact

men

t of

scri

pt T

ES

TD

for

def

ects

fou

nd d

urin

g bu

ild, i

nteg

rati

on,

and

syst

em te

st a

ctiv

itie

s, b

ut th

e pr

oces

ses

targ

eted

are

pot

enti

ally

any

whe

re in

the

engi

neer

ing

life

cycl

e an

d co

ncei

vabl

y ou

tsid

e th

e sc

ope

of th

e E

ngin

eeri

ng P

As

alto

geth

er. P

IPs

and

PM

s so

met

imes

help

to id

enti

fy r

oot c

ause

s of

def

ects

or

othe

r pr

oces

s pr

oble

ms.

S

116

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

11

7

9 T

SP

an

d C

MM

I Su

pp

ort

Pro

cess

Are

as

9.1

Sco

pe

of

SU

PP

OR

T

The

Sup

port

pro

cess

are

as c

over

the

acti

vitie

s th

at s

uppo

rt p

rodu

ct d

evel

opm

ent a

nd m

aint

enan

ce. T

he S

uppo

rt P

As

addr

ess

proc

esse

s th

at a

re u

sed

in th

e co

ntex

t of

perf

orm

ing

othe

r pr

oces

ses.

In

gene

ral,

thes

e PA

s ad

dres

s pr

oces

ses

that

are

targ

eted

tow

ards

the

proj

ect,

but m

ay a

lso

addr

ess

proc

esse

s th

at a

pply

mor

e ge

nera

lly to

the

orga

niza

tion.

For

exa

mpl

e, P

roce

ss a

nd P

rodu

ct Q

ualit

y A

ssur

ance

can

be

used

wit

h al

l pro

cess

are

as to

pr

ovid

e an

obj

ecti

ve e

valu

atio

n of

sel

ecte

d pr

oces

ses

and

wor

k pr

oduc

ts d

escr

ibed

in th

ose

proc

ess

area

s. T

he p

age

num

bers

for

eac

h PA

as

liste

d be

low

are

fro

m C

MM

I: G

uide

line

s fo

r P

roce

ss I

mpr

ovem

ent a

nd P

rodu

ct I

mpr

ovem

ent [

Chr

issi

s 03

].

The

Sup

port

pro

cess

cat

egor

y co

ntai

ns th

e fo

llow

ing

proc

ess

area

s.

Con

figu

ratio

n M

anag

emen

t pa

ges

157-

172

Proc

ess

and

Prod

uct Q

ualit

y A

ssur

ance

pa

ges

429-

440

Mea

sure

men

t and

Ana

lysi

s pa

ges

247-

266

Dec

isio

n A

naly

sis

and

Res

olut

ion

page

s 17

3-18

6 O

rgan

izat

iona

l Env

iron

men

t for

Int

egra

tion

pa

ges

267-

286

Cau

sal A

naly

sis

and

Res

olut

ion

page

s 14

3-15

6

118

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

9.1.

1 C

on

fig

ura

tio

n M

anag

emen

t (C

M)

The

Con

figu

ratio

n M

anag

emen

t (C

M)

proc

ess

area

sup

port

s al

l pro

cess

are

as b

y es

tabl

ishi

ng a

nd m

aint

aini

ng th

e in

tegr

ity o

f w

ork

prod

ucts

usi

ng

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t, co

nfig

urat

ion

cont

rol,

conf

igur

atio

n st

atus

acc

ount

ing,

and

con

figu

ratio

n au

dits

. The

wor

k pr

oduc

ts p

lace

d un

der

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t inc

lude

the

prod

ucts

, acq

uire

d pr

oduc

ts, t

ools

, and

oth

er it

ems

that

are

use

d in

cre

atin

g an

d de

scri

bing

thes

e w

ork

prod

ucts

. Exa

mpl

es o

f w

ork

prod

ucts

that

may

be

plac

ed u

nder

con

figu

ratio

n m

anag

emen

t inc

lude

pla

ns, p

roce

ss d

escr

iptio

ns, r

equi

rem

ents

, des

ign

data

, dra

win

gs, p

rodu

ct s

peci

fica

tions

, cod

e, c

ompi

lers

, pro

duct

dat

a fi

les,

and

pro

duct

tech

nica

l pub

lica

tions

.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Bas

elin

es o

f id

enti

fied

wor

k

prod

ucts

are

est

ablis

hed.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

INV

, ST

RA

T,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

1.1.

Ide

ntif

y th

e co

nfig

urat

ion

item

s,

com

pone

nts,

and

rel

ated

wor

k pr

oduc

ts th

at

will

be

plac

ed u

nder

con

figu

ratio

n

man

agem

ent.

Rol

es:

Sup

port

and

proc

ess

man

ager

s, “

line

”

role

man

ager

s,

team

mem

ber

Mos

t con

figu

rati

ons

item

s to

be

deve

lope

d,

incl

udin

g w

hen

they

are

to b

e ba

seli

ned,

are

iden

tifi

ed in

LA

U3

(as

capt

ured

on

the

SU

MS

,

ST

RA

T, o

r IN

V f

orm

s). E

ach

of th

e na

med

rol

es

has

spec

ific

con

figu

rati

on m

anag

emen

t

resp

onsi

bili

ties

at s

ome

poin

t in

the

proc

ess

for

desi

gnat

ed w

ork

prod

ucts

.

P

Det

ails

suc

h as

com

pone

nt a

nd u

niqu

e

iden

tifi

ers

are

not s

peci

fica

lly

addr

esse

d by

the

TS

P, s

ince

ther

e is

an

assu

mpt

ion

that

spec

ific

org

aniz

atio

nal p

ract

ices

eit

her

are

or w

ill b

e pu

t int

o pl

ace

to a

ddre

ss s

uch

thin

gs. I

n pr

acti

ce, h

owev

er, t

he v

ario

us

role

man

ager

s w

ho h

ave

spec

ific

resp

onsi

bili

ties

for

spe

cifi

c ba

seli

ned

prod

ucts

usu

ally

dea

l wit

h su

ch d

etai

ls.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

11

9

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3

Rol

es:

Sup

port

man

ager

1.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

a co

nfig

urat

ion

man

agem

ent a

nd c

hang

e m

anag

emen

t

syst

em f

or c

ontr

ollin

g w

ork

prod

ucts

.

Oth

er:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R

The

sup

port

man

ager

has

spe

cifi

c re

spon

sibi

lity

for

the

proj

ect’

s co

nfig

urat

ion

man

agem

ent

syst

em a

nd p

ract

ices

. Pre

para

tion

guid

elin

es c

all

for

a de

sign

ated

team

mem

ber

to b

ring

cop

ies

of

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

tand

ard

conf

igur

atio

n

man

agem

ent a

nd c

hang

e co

ntro

l pro

cess

es to

the

laun

ch. A

ny a

ddit

iona

l rel

evan

t pro

cess

item

s

need

ed b

y th

e pr

ojec

t are

iden

tifie

d in

LA

U3.

P

No

guid

ance

is p

rovi

ded

as to

the

type

of

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t sys

tem

or

chan

ge p

roce

dure

s. T

his

is ty

pica

lly

an

idio

sync

rati

c ac

tivi

ty in

any

org

aniz

atio

n.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

HL

D, I

MP

,

TE

ST

1, L

AU

3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.3.

Cre

ate

or r

elea

se b

asel

ines

for

inte

rnal

use

and

for

deli

very

to th

e cu

stom

er.

Rol

es:

Sup

port

man

ager

, tea

m

mem

ber

The

var

ious

hig

h-le

vel s

crip

ts c

all f

or c

reat

ing

or

upda

ting

base

line

s fo

r sp

ecif

ic p

rodu

cts

at

spec

ific

poi

nts

in th

e de

velo

pmen

t pro

cess

.

Spe

cifi

c ta

sks

shou

ld b

e in

clud

ed in

TA

SK

pla

ns

and

logg

ed a

s ap

prop

riat

e. T

he s

uppo

rt m

anag

er

chai

rs th

e C

CB

(L

AU

3), w

hich

acc

epts

or

reje

cts

prop

osed

cha

nges

to b

asel

ined

pro

duct

s an

d

appr

oves

rel

ease

.

P

SG2.

Cha

nges

to

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts

unde

r co

nfig

urat

ion

man

agem

ent

are

trac

ked

and

cont

rolle

d.

120

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

RE

L1,

WE

EK

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

2.1.

Tra

ck c

hang

e re

ques

ts f

or th

e

conf

igur

atio

n it

ems.

Rol

es:

Sup

port

and

“lin

e” r

ole

man

ager

s

Par

t of

the

purp

ose

of R

EL

1 is

to u

pdat

e th

e

team

on

cust

omer

req

uire

men

ts c

hang

es. R

ole

man

ager

s re

spon

sibl

e fo

r pa

rtic

ular

con

figu

rati

on

item

s, s

uch

as r

equi

rem

ents

doc

umen

ts

(cus

tom

er in

terf

ace

man

ager

), d

esig

n ar

tifac

ts

(des

ign

man

ager

), c

ode

(im

plem

enta

tion

man

ager

), a

nd te

st p

roce

dure

s an

d re

sult

s (t

est

man

ager

), a

re s

peci

fica

lly

task

ed to

pro

vide

timel

y in

form

atio

n to

the

CC

B (

chai

red

by th

e

supp

ort m

anag

er).

The

sup

port

man

ager

typi

call

y

repo

rts

conf

igur

atio

n st

atus

at t

he w

eekl

y te

am

mee

ting

(WE

EK

).

P

The

leve

l of

deta

il a

ddre

ssed

in th

e T

SP

goes

mor

e to

cha

nges

in r

equi

rem

ents

rat

her

than

in s

peci

fic

conf

igur

atio

n ite

ms.

It i

s th

e

lack

of

met

hods

for

trac

king

the

chan

ge

requ

ests

(ra

ther

than

the

chan

ges

requ

este

d)

that

cau

ses

this

to f

all s

hort

of

a “D

” ra

ting

.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

HL

D, I

MP

,

TE

ST

1

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.2.

Con

trol

cha

nges

to th

e co

nfig

urat

ion

item

s.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, d

esig

n,

impl

emen

tati

on,

supp

ort,

and,

cust

omer

inte

rfac

e

man

ager

s

The

ref

eren

ced

scri

pts

have

ste

ps f

or th

e C

CB

to

auth

oriz

e th

e cr

eati

on o

r re

leas

e of

bas

elin

es.

The

CC

B is

cha

ired

by

the

supp

ort m

anag

er,

typi

call

y in

clud

es th

e te

am le

ader

and

des

ign

man

ager

s, a

nd r

espo

nds

to c

hang

e re

ques

ts b

ased

part

iall

y on

inpu

t fro

m th

e ot

her

role

man

ager

s.

P

TS

P d

oes

not s

peci

fica

lly

addr

ess

CC

B

proc

edur

es, a

lthou

gh c

hang

e co

ntro

l

proc

edur

es a

re u

sual

ly id

enti

fied

for

crea

tion

in L

AU

3 (i

f no

t alr

eady

in p

lace

).

The

pro

cess

and

sup

port

man

ager

s ha

ve a

join

t res

pons

ibili

ty in

this

reg

ard.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

12

1

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG3.

Int

egri

ty o

f ba

selin

es is

est

ablis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

INV

, WE

EK

Rol

es:

Pla

nnin

g

and

supp

ort

man

ager

s

3.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

reco

rds

desc

ribi

ng c

onfi

gura

tion

item

s.

Oth

er:

NO

TE

BO

OK

The

laun

ch p

roce

ss in

itia

tes

this

pro

cess

by

crea

ting

the

SU

MS

and

IN

V. T

he s

uppo

rt

man

ager

rep

orts

on

conf

igur

atio

n st

atus

cha

nges

at th

e w

eekl

y te

am m

eeti

ng. T

he p

lann

ing

man

ager

wou

ld s

tore

at l

east

par

tial i

nfor

mat

ion

on c

onfi

gura

tion

item

s in

SU

MS

and

pro

ject

NO

TE

BO

OK

.

P

Spe

cifi

c pr

oced

ures

and

sta

ndar

ds f

or

esta

blis

hing

and

mai

ntai

ning

thes

e re

cord

s

wou

ld b

e id

enti

fied

in L

AU

3, e

ithe

r as

need

ing

to b

e cr

eate

d ne

w o

r to

be

used

or

adap

ted

from

org

aniz

atio

nal s

tand

ards

.

Dev

elop

ing

or a

dapt

ing

thes

e w

ould

be

the

resp

onsi

bili

ty o

f th

e pr

oces

s m

anag

er, w

hile

the

supp

ort m

anag

er w

ould

act

ually

impl

emen

t the

m.

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

1,

TE

ST

2, T

ES

T3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

3.2.

Per

form

con

figu

rati

on a

udit

s to

mai

ntai

n th

e in

tegr

ity

of c

onfi

gura

tion

base

line

s.

Rol

es:

Pro

cess

,

supp

ort,

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s, te

am

lead

er

The

TE

ST

x sc

ript

s in

dica

te th

at b

uild

s ar

e

veri

fied

but

do

not o

ffer

spe

cifi

cs o

n ho

w to

perf

orm

the

audi

t. Su

ch a

udit

s m

ight

rea

sona

bly

be in

terp

rete

d as

fal

ling

und

er th

e su

ppor

t

man

ager

, qua

lity

man

ager

, pro

cess

man

ager

, or

team

lead

er r

oles

. The

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K, L

OG

T,

and

poss

ibly

LO

GD

for

ms

refl

ect t

hese

task

s fo

r

who

ever

is a

ssig

ned.

P

The

scr

ipts

and

rol

e de

scri

ptio

ns p

arti

ally

addr

ess

the

inte

nt o

f th

e pr

acti

ce, b

ut th

e

acti

ons

men

tion

ed a

re n

ot in

eno

ugh

deta

il

to b

e ex

ecut

ed in

a r

epea

tabl

e m

anne

r.

122

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

9.1.

2 P

roce

ss a

nd

Pro

du

ct Q

ual

ity

Ass

ura

nce

(P

PQ

A)

The

Pro

cess

and

Pro

duct

Qua

lity

Ass

uran

ce (

PPQ

A)

proc

ess

area

sup

port

s al

l pro

cess

are

as b

y pr

ovid

ing

spec

ific

pra

ctic

es f

or o

bjec

tive

ly e

valu

atin

g pe

rfor

med

pro

cess

es, w

ork

prod

ucts

, and

ser

vice

s ag

ains

t the

app

licab

le p

roce

ss d

escr

ipti

ons,

sta

ndar

ds, a

nd p

roce

dure

s an

d en

suri

ng th

at a

ny is

sues

ar

isin

g fr

om th

ese

revi

ews

are

addr

esse

d. P

roce

ss a

nd P

rodu

ct Q

ualit

y A

ssur

ance

sup

port

s th

e de

liver

y of

hig

h-qu

alit

y pr

oduc

ts a

nd s

ervi

ces

by

prov

idin

g th

e pr

ojec

t sta

ff a

nd a

ll le

vels

of

man

ager

s w

ith

appr

opri

ate

visi

bilit

y in

to, a

nd f

eedb

ack

on, t

he p

roce

sses

and

ass

ocia

ted

wor

k pr

oduc

ts

thro

ugho

ut th

e lif

e of

the

proj

ect.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Adh

eren

ce o

f th

e pe

rfor

med

proc

ess

and

asso

ciat

ed w

ork

prod

ucts

and

serv

ices

to

appl

icab

le p

roce

ss

defi

niti

ons,

sta

ndar

ds, a

nd p

roce

dure

s is

obje

ctiv

ely

eval

uate

d.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

MT

G, S

TA

TU

S,

PM

, che

ckpo

int

revi

ew

1.1.

Obj

ecti

vely

eva

luat

e th

e de

sign

ated

perf

orm

ed p

roce

sses

aga

inst

the

appl

icab

le

proc

ess

desc

ript

ions

, sta

ndar

ds, a

nd

proc

edur

es.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

INS,

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

,

SU

MM

AR

Y,

PIP

, IT

L

Mos

t pro

cess

scr

ipts

are

def

ined

and

rev

iew

ed a

s

nece

ssar

y by

the

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

(s)

and

the

team

. Non

-com

plia

nces

are

bro

ught

to th

e

team

’s a

tten

tion

dur

ing

the

wee

kly

mee

ting

and

logg

ed in

the

mee

ting

min

utes

. Les

sons

lear

ned

are

capt

ured

in th

e ph

ase

and

proj

ect p

ost-

mor

tem

mee

ting

s on

PIP

s. T

he C

heck

poin

t

Rev

iew

(us

uall

y co

nduc

ted

by a

n au

thor

ized

TS

P

coac

h) p

rovi

des

an in

depe

nden

t vie

w o

f th

e

team

’s c

ompl

ianc

e w

ith

TS

P p

ract

ices

and

thei

r

P

Whi

le th

ere

is n

o sp

ecif

ic a

ctiv

ity

in th

e

TS

P to

rev

iew

item

s no

t spe

cifi

call

y ca

lled

out w

ithi

n th

e T

SP

, thi

s is

oft

en a

dut

y

take

n up

by

one

or a

noth

er o

f th

e re

leva

nt

role

man

ager

s (e

.g.,

desi

gn s

tand

ards

by

the

desi

gn m

anag

er, c

odin

g st

anda

rds

by th

e

impl

emen

tati

on m

anag

er),

by

the

proc

ess

or

qual

ity

man

ager

in th

e ge

neri

c ca

se, o

r by

the

team

lead

er.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

12

3

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

bers

, rol

e

man

ager

s (e

sp.

proc

ess

and

qual

ity)

stat

us a

gain

st th

eir

plan

. The

team

lead

er h

as

prim

ary

resp

onsi

bili

ty, s

uppo

rted

mai

nly

by th

e

proc

ess

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s, to

the

orga

niza

tion

for

ensu

ring

that

the

wor

k is

pla

nned

acc

ordi

ng

to a

def

ined

pro

cess

and

then

com

plet

ed

acco

rdin

g to

the

plan

.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

HL

D, I

MP

,

TE

ST

, TE

ST

1,

TE

ST

2, T

ES

T3,

TE

ST

D, P

M,

Che

ckpo

int

Rev

iew

For

ms:

SU

MP

,

SU

MQ

, IN

S,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

1.2.

Obj

ecti

vely

eva

luat

e th

e de

sign

ated

wor

k pr

oduc

ts a

nd s

ervi

ces

agai

nst t

he

appl

icab

le p

roce

ss d

escr

iptio

ns, s

tand

ards

,

and

proc

edur

es.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

est a

nd

qual

ity

man

ager

s

TS

P h

as v

ario

us m

echa

nism

s to

eva

luat

e w

ork

prod

ucts

and

ser

vice

s; h

ow th

ey a

re im

plem

ente

d

wil

l var

y fr

om te

am to

team

. The

se a

ctiv

itie

s ar

e

revi

ewed

on

an in

divi

dual

and

team

bas

is a

nd a

re

peri

odic

ally

rev

iew

ed w

ith

seni

or m

anag

emen

t

and

the

TS

P c

oach

. Spe

cifi

c ac

tivi

ties

dur

ing

deve

lopm

ent d

eal d

irec

tly

wit

h w

ork

prod

uct

eval

uati

on, e

spec

iall

y in

spec

tion

s (s

crip

t IN

S).

The

qua

lity

and

test

man

ager

s ha

ve s

peci

fic

resp

onsi

bili

ties

reg

ardi

ng p

rodu

ct q

uali

ty.

P

The

TS

P is

mis

sing

rev

iew

s fo

r ite

ms

not

spec

ific

ally

cal

led

out w

ithi

n th

e T

SP

.

124

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG2.

Non

com

plia

nce

issu

es a

re

obje

ctiv

ely

trac

ked

and

com

mun

icat

ed,

and

reso

luti

on is

ens

ured

.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

SU

MM

AR

Y,

SU

MP

, SU

MQ

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, a

ll r

ole

man

ager

s (e

sp.

qual

ity,

test

, and

proc

ess)

2.1.

Com

mun

icat

e qu

alit

y is

sues

and

ens

ure

reso

lutio

n of

non

com

plia

nce

issu

es w

ith

the

staf

f an

d m

anag

ers.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

,

NO

TE

BO

OK

Issu

es a

nd th

eir

reso

luti

on a

re tr

acke

d du

ring

the

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

(do

cum

ente

d on

for

m

WE

EK

) an

d an

y ot

her

ST

AT

US

mee

ting

s

(doc

umen

ted

on f

orm

SU

MM

AR

Y o

r a

form

cust

omiz

ed to

the

proj

ect o

r or

gani

zati

on).

All

such

doc

umen

tati

on e

vent

uall

y is

gat

here

d in

to

the

proj

ect N

OT

EB

OO

K. I

ssue

s th

at a

re n

ot

reso

lvab

le a

t the

team

leve

l are

rev

iew

ed w

ith

man

agem

ent a

t qua

rter

ly r

evie

w m

eeti

ngs.

D

Non

-com

plia

nces

are

not

spe

cifi

call

y

cove

red

in th

e T

SP. H

owev

er, b

ecau

se th

e

mec

hani

sm is

ful

ly in

pla

ce a

nd

docu

men

ted,

thes

e is

sues

wou

ld b

e tr

acke

d.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

12

5

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

SU

MP

,

SU

MQ

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

SU

MM

AR

Y

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, p

roce

ss

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s

2.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

reco

rds

of th

e

qual

ity

assu

ranc

e ac

tivi

ties

.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

,

NO

TE

BO

OK

The

team

lead

er, p

roce

ss m

anag

er, a

nd q

ualit

y

man

ager

s ke

ep tr

ack

of d

iffe

rent

qua

lity

assu

ranc

e is

sues

. Inf

orm

atio

n re

gard

ing

the

issu

es/n

on-c

ompl

ianc

es is

cap

ture

d in

the

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

(W

EE

K)

or o

ther

ST

AT

US

mee

ting

usi

ng th

e S

UM

P a

nd/o

r S

UM

Q a

nd

poss

ibly

TA

SK

pla

ns, t

ime

logs

, and

def

ect l

ogs.

All

suc

h in

form

atio

n is

cap

ture

d in

the

proj

ect

NO

TE

BO

OK

.

D

126

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

9.1.

3 M

easu

rem

ent

and

An

alys

is (

MA

)

The

Mea

sure

men

t and

Ana

lysi

s (M

A)

proc

ess

area

sup

port

s al

l pro

cess

are

as b

y pr

ovid

ing

spec

ific

pra

ctic

es th

at g

uide

pro

ject

s an

d or

gani

zatio

ns in

al

igni

ng m

easu

rem

ent n

eeds

and

obj

ectiv

es w

ith a

mea

sure

men

t app

roac

h th

at w

ill p

rovi

de o

bjec

tive

resu

lts. T

hese

res

ults

can

be

used

in m

akin

g in

form

ed d

ecis

ions

and

taki

ng a

ppro

pria

te c

orre

ctiv

e ac

tions

.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Mea

sure

men

t ob

ject

ives

and

acti

viti

es a

re a

ligne

d w

ith

iden

tifi

ed

info

rmat

ion

need

s an

d ob

ject

ives

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U

esp.

LA

U1,

LA

U2,

WE

EK

For

ms:

GO

AL

,

SU

MP

, WE

EK

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

all

rol

e

man

ager

s

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

mea

sure

men

t

obje

ctiv

es th

at a

re d

eriv

ed f

rom

iden

tifi

ed

info

rmat

ion

need

s an

d ob

ject

ives

.

Oth

er:

Sen

ior

man

agem

ent

and

mar

keti

ng

laun

ch

guid

elin

es

Mea

sure

men

t obj

ecti

ves

of T

SP

are

exp

lici

t and

deri

ve f

rom

TS

P d

esig

n go

als.

The

y ar

e

com

mun

icat

ed th

roug

hout

PSP

and

TS

P tr

aini

ng

for

all r

oles

: del

iver

a h

igh-

qual

ity p

rodu

ct (

as

clos

e to

zer

o cu

stom

er-d

isco

vere

d de

fect

s as

poss

ible

, mea

sure

d by

def

ect d

ensi

ty, e

spec

iall

y

thro

ugh

vari

ous

test

pha

ses)

on

sche

dule

(mea

sure

d by

ear

ned

valu

e ag

ains

t the

pla

n).

Suc

h ob

ject

ives

are

inte

rpre

ted

and

typi

call

y

adde

d to

by

seni

or m

anag

emen

t and

mar

keti

ng

duri

ng L

AU

1. T

he te

am th

en r

efin

es th

e

obje

ctiv

es a

nd q

uant

ifie

s th

em w

here

pos

sibl

e

duri

ng L

AU

2 on

for

m G

OA

L. T

hese

goa

ls a

nd

mea

sure

s gu

ide

the

laun

ch a

nd th

e pr

ojec

t goi

ng

forw

ard.

D

Man

agem

ent g

oals

rel

ated

to e

ffec

tive

ly

man

agin

g sc

hedu

le, c

ost (

in te

rms

of e

ffor

t),

and

qual

ity

are

usua

lly

wha

t dri

ve T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

in a

n or

gani

zatio

n.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

12

7

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U2

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

SU

MP

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

GO

AL

1.2.

Spe

cify

mea

sure

s to

add

ress

the

mea

sure

men

t obj

ecti

ves.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

bers

, rol

e

man

ager

s

Eff

ort (

tim

e on

task

), s

ize,

def

ects

, and

dat

e

com

plet

e ar

e th

e fu

ndam

enta

l bas

e m

easu

res

of

the

TS

P. T

here

are

a n

umbe

r of

met

rics

der

ived

from

thes

e ba

se m

easu

res.

The

gat

heri

ng o

f th

e

base

met

rics

is r

equi

red

in T

SP s

crip

ts a

nd

happ

ens

in L

OG

T (

effo

rt),

LO

GD

(de

fect

s),

TA

SK

(da

te c

ompl

ete)

, and

SU

MS

(pr

oduc

t

size

). A

ddit

iona

l met

rics

are

req

uest

ed d

urin

g

LA

U1

and/

or d

efin

ed d

urin

g L

AU

2 if

nec

essa

ry

and

capt

ured

on

form

GO

AL

.

D

Scri

pts:

Mos

t

laun

ch a

nd

deve

lopm

ent

scri

pts

For

ms:

TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

(SU

MS

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

)

Rol

es:

Tea

m

mem

ber,

qual

ity,

and

supp

ort

man

ager

s

1.3.

Spe

cify

how

mea

sure

men

t dat

a w

ill b

e

obta

ined

and

sto

red.

Oth

er:

NO

TE

BO

OK

A k

ey T

SP

pri

ncip

le is

the

capt

ure

of e

ffor

t, si

ze

and

defe

cts

data

at t

he in

divi

dual

leve

l. M

ost

TS

P s

crip

ts r

equi

re th

e ga

ther

ing

of th

ese

base

met

rics

as

appr

opri

ate,

whi

ch a

re c

aptu

red

in

TS

P in

divi

dual

wor

kboo

ks, s

umm

ariz

ed in

the

TS

P c

onso

lidat

ed w

orkb

ook,

and

sto

red

for

late

r

anal

ysis

in th

e pr

ojec

t NO

TE

BO

OK

.

D

The

cap

abil

ity

to c

aptu

re th

ese

base

mea

sure

s is

fun

dam

enta

l to

TS

P. H

owev

er,

the

TS

P d

oes

not a

ddre

ss th

e ca

ptur

e of

dat

a

from

all

proc

esse

s.

128

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

, PM

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

, PIP

Rol

es:

Pla

nnin

g,

proc

ess,

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s

1.4.

Spe

cify

how

mea

sure

men

t dat

a w

ill b

e

anal

yzed

and

rep

orte

d.

Oth

er:

SU

MM

AR

Y,

quar

terl

y re

view

chec

klis

t

Tea

m d

ata

is r

evie

wed

by

the

team

dur

ing

the

wee

kly

mee

ting

(W

EE

K)

and

anal

yzed

wit

h

resp

ect t

o th

e te

am b

eing

abl

e to

mee

t its

com

mit

ted

goal

s. O

ther

ST

AT

US

mee

ting

s ar

e

held

or

SU

MM

AR

Y r

epor

ts p

repa

red

as

nece

ssar

y. A

t the

end

of

ever

y de

velo

pmen

t

cycl

e an

d pr

ojec

t the

pos

tmor

tem

(P

M)

com

pare

s

the

team

’s a

ctua

ls to

its

plan

s an

d no

tes

any

issu

es o

r op

port

unit

ies

for

impr

ovem

ent (

PIP

s).

Qua

rter

ly p

roje

ct r

evie

ws

usua

lly

high

ligh

t

impo

rtan

t dat

a fo

r m

anag

emen

t.

D

SG2.

Mea

sure

men

t re

sult

s th

at a

ddre

ss

iden

tifi

ed in

form

atio

n ne

eds

and

obje

ctiv

es a

re p

rovi

ded.

Scri

pts:

Mos

t

laun

ch a

nd

deve

lopm

ent

scri

pts

2.1.

Obt

ain

spec

ifie

d m

easu

rem

ent d

ata.

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

, TS

P

cons

olid

ated

wor

kboo

k

Tea

m m

embe

rs c

olle

ct ti

me

and

defe

ct d

ata

as

they

per

form

thei

r ta

sks,

and

siz

e in

form

atio

n as

it b

ecom

es a

vail

able

. Oth

er in

form

atio

n is

usua

lly

capt

ured

or

sum

mar

ized

as

nece

ssar

y by

the

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

(e.

g., t

he q

uali

ty

man

ager

gat

hers

tim

e an

d de

fect

dat

a fo

r

insp

ecti

ons

from

rev

iew

ers,

plu

s si

ze d

ata

from

the

deve

lope

r). T

his

info

rmat

ion

is c

onso

lidat

ed

for

use

by th

e te

am a

nd r

ole

man

ager

s in

the

TSP

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

12

9

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es:

Tea

m

mem

bers

, rol

e

man

ager

s as

appr

opri

ate

wor

kboo

ks o

r el

sew

here

(e.

g., f

orm

IN

S f

or

insp

ecti

ons)

.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

, PM

For

ms:

TS

P

cons

olid

ated

wor

kboo

k,

WE

EK

2.2.

Ana

lyze

and

inte

rpre

t mea

sure

men

t

data

.

Rol

es:

Rol

e

man

ager

s (e

sp.

plan

ning

,

qual

ity,

sup

port

,

and

test

)

The

team

rev

iew

s it

s da

ta o

n a

regu

lar

basi

s

(WE

EK

), a

t pha

se a

nd p

roje

ct p

ostm

orte

ms

(PM

), a

nd f

or o

ther

ST

AT

US

mee

tings

as

nece

ssar

y. R

ole

man

ager

s re

view

team

dat

a an

d

perf

orm

ana

lyse

s, a

s ap

prop

riat

e fo

r th

eir

role

s.

D

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

PM

For

ms:

TS

P

indi

vidu

al a

nd

cons

olid

ated

wor

kboo

ks

2.3.

Man

age

and

stor

e m

easu

rem

ent d

ata,

mea

sure

men

t spe

cifi

cati

ons,

and

ana

lysi

s

resu

lts.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

all

rol

e

man

ager

s

Tea

m a

nd in

divi

dual

wor

kboo

ks, t

eam

mee

ting

min

utes

, and

pos

tmor

tem

dat

a ar

e ca

ptur

ed in

the

indi

vidu

al a

nd c

onso

lidat

ed w

orkb

ooks

, in

the

wee

kly

mee

ting

min

utes

, at p

ostm

orte

m

mee

tings

, and

in th

e pr

ojec

t NO

TE

BO

OK

.

D

The

exa

ct f

orm

of

the

proj

ect N

OT

EB

OO

K

vari

es w

idel

y, r

angi

ng f

rom

cap

turi

ng

prin

ted

sum

mar

ies

from

the

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

in a

phy

sica

l bin

der

alon

g w

ith

othe

r

rele

vant

doc

umen

ts to

cop

ying

sna

psho

ts o

f

wor

kboo

ks o

n a

netw

ork

disk

on

a w

eekl

y

basi

s to

exp

orti

ng s

umm

ary

data

to a

corp

orat

e da

taba

se.

130

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Oth

er:

NO

TE

BO

OK

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

, PM

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ook

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

2.4.

Rep

ort r

esul

ts o

f m

easu

rem

ent a

nd

anal

ysis

act

ivit

ies

to a

ll r

elev

ant

stak

ehol

ders

.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

Tea

m d

ata

is r

evie

wed

by

the

team

dur

ing

the

wee

kly

mee

ting

and

rep

orte

d to

man

agem

ent a

nd

the

cust

omer

on

a pe

riod

ic b

asis

. Qua

rter

ly

proj

ect r

evie

ws

focu

s he

avil

y on

dat

a

sum

mar

ized

fro

m th

e te

am’s

ow

n m

easu

rem

ents

of it

s ac

tivi

ties

.

P

“Per

iodi

c” is

def

ined

by

the

orga

niza

tion

,

usua

lly

vary

ing

anyw

here

fro

m w

eekl

y to

quar

terl

y.

Pro

visi

ons

for

all r

elev

ant s

take

hold

ers

are

not e

xpli

cit.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

13

1

9.1.

4 D

ecis

ion

An

alys

is a

nd

Res

olu

tio

n (

DA

R)

The

Dec

isio

n A

naly

sis

and

Res

olut

ion

(DA

R)

proc

ess

area

sup

port

s al

l pro

cess

are

as b

y pr

ovid

ing

a fo

rmal

eva

luat

ion

proc

ess

that

ens

ures

that

al

tern

ativ

es a

re c

ompa

red

and

the

best

one

is s

elec

ted

to a

ccom

plis

h th

e go

als

of th

e pr

oces

s ar

eas.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Dec

isio

ns a

re b

ased

on

an

eval

uati

on o

f al

tern

ativ

es u

sing

esta

blis

hed

crit

eria

.

Scri

pts:

All

laun

ch s

crip

ts,

esp.

LA

U1

and

LA

U2,

WE

EK

For

ms:

GO

AL

,

laun

ch m

eeti

ng

min

utes

, WE

EK

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

guid

elin

es to

dete

rmin

e w

hich

issu

es a

re s

ubje

ct to

a

form

al e

valu

atio

n pr

oces

s.

Rol

es:

Rol

e

man

ager

s

TS

P d

oes

not p

rovi

de f

orm

al g

uide

line

s fo

r D

AR

acti

viti

es. H

owev

er, t

he p

ract

ices

are

sup

port

ed

thro

ugho

ut th

e la

unch

, as

plan

s ar

e co

nsta

ntly

bein

g ev

alua

ted

agai

nst t

he te

am’s

goa

ls a

nd

cons

trai

nts.

Bei

ng u

nabl

e to

mee

t one

or

mor

e

goal

s w

ithi

n th

e co

nstr

aint

s fo

rces

the

team

into

a de

cisi

on a

naly

sis

and

reso

luti

on a

ctiv

ity.

P

The

TS

P s

tron

gly

(tho

ugh

info

rmal

ly)

supp

orts

suc

h ac

tivi

ties

by

prov

idin

g da

ta to

esta

blis

h cr

iter

ia f

or a

var

iety

of

proj

ect

man

agem

ent a

nd e

ngin

eeri

ng a

ctiv

itie

s an

d

by th

e in

buil

t TSP

bia

s to

war

d fo

rmal

proc

ess,

a q

uali

ty f

ocus

, and

dat

a-ba

sed

deci

sion

mak

ing.

The

team

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s, a

nd te

am m

embe

rs e

ach

addr

ess

issu

es th

at im

pact

thei

r ar

eas

of

resp

onsi

bili

ty o

n an

ong

oing

, as-

need

ed

basi

s.

In a

ddit

ion

to th

e la

unch

pro

cess

as

an

exam

ple

of D

AR

pri

ncip

les

appl

ied

to

proj

ect m

anag

emen

t, a

smal

ler,

sel

f-

cont

aine

d in

stan

ce o

f D

AR

is th

e L

AU

7

scri

pt f

or r

isk

eval

uati

on. L

AU

7 ta

kes

the

expl

icit

dec

isio

n th

at r

isks

are

sub

ject

to

132

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

form

al e

valu

atio

n by

the

team

(S

P 1

.1),

use

s

team

bra

inst

orm

ing

to g

ener

ate

a li

st o

f

pote

ntia

l ris

ks (

SP 1

.3),

use

s es

tabl

ishe

d

crit

eria

(S

P 1

.2)

for

rank

ing

the

likel

ihoo

d

and

effe

ct o

f ri

sk r

eali

zati

on (

SP 1

.4),

use

s

the

resu

ltin

g in

form

atio

n to

dec

ide

on w

hich

risk

s ne

ed a

mit

igat

ion

stra

tegy

(S

P 1

.5),

and

eith

er d

evel

ops

mit

igat

ion

or a

ssig

ns

the

risk

to a

team

mem

ber

or m

embe

rs to

do

so (

SP 1

.6).

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U9

Rol

es:

Rol

e

man

ager

s

1.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

crite

ria

for

eval

uati

ng a

lter

nati

ves,

and

the

rela

tive

rank

ing

of th

ese

crit

eria

.

Oth

er:

Sen

ior

man

agem

ent

laun

ch

guid

elin

es

The

cri

teri

a fo

r ev

alua

ting

alt

erna

tive

s du

ring

the

laun

ch in

volv

e ba

lanc

ing

requ

irem

ents

, del

iver

y

date

, qua

lity

, and

res

ourc

e co

nstr

aint

s. R

anki

ng

of th

ese

crit

eria

is c

over

ed b

y th

e se

nior

man

ager

brie

fing

in L

AU

1, a

nd p

ossi

bly

revi

site

d du

ring

LA

U9

if c

onfl

icti

ng a

lter

nati

ves

aris

e.

P

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

13

3

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6,

LA

U8

For

ms:

IN

V

1.3.

Ide

ntif

y al

tern

ativ

e so

luti

ons

to a

ddre

ss

issu

es.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

The

team

iden

tifi

es p

roce

sses

that

it r

equi

res

to

addr

ess

tech

nica

l iss

ues

in L

AU

3 or

dur

ing

exec

utio

n of

thei

r as

sign

ed ta

sks.

Dur

ing

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6,

and

LA

U8,

if th

e te

am is

una

ble

to m

eet o

ne o

r m

ore

goal

s, a

lter

nati

ve p

lans

are

gene

rate

d. T

ypic

al a

lter

nati

ves

incl

ude

addi

tiona

l

pers

onne

l, re

duct

ion

in o

r ph

ased

del

iver

y of

func

tion

alit

y, o

r sc

hedu

le r

elie

f.

P

Scri

pts:

LA

U2-

LA

U9

For

ms:

WE

EK

1.4.

Sel

ect t

he e

valu

atio

n m

etho

ds.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

, tea

m

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

Dur

ing

the

laun

ch, t

he te

am e

ngag

es in

a

coll

ecti

ve a

naly

sis

of p

lann

ing

opti

ons

and

how

wel

l the

goa

ls d

efin

ed in

LA

U2

are

met

. Thi

s

incl

udes

a p

reli

min

ary

anal

ysis

of

the

sche

dule

and

effo

rt r

equi

red

duri

ng L

AU

4, a

naly

sis

of

qual

ity

goal

s du

ring

LA

U5,

a r

evis

ited

ana

lysi

s

of s

ched

ule

and

effo

rt d

urin

g L

AU

6, a

nd

anal

ysis

of

proj

ect r

isks

dur

ing

LA

U7.

LA

U8

addr

esse

s is

sues

that

hav

e no

t bee

n re

solv

ed

prev

ious

ly. T

he u

ltim

ate

eval

uati

on is

for

man

agem

ent i

n L

AU

9 af

ter

pres

enta

tion

of

alte

rnat

ives

by

the

team

.

P

134

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U6,

LA

U8,

LA

U9

1.5.

Eva

luat

e al

tern

ativ

e so

lutio

ns u

sing

the

esta

blis

hed

crit

eria

and

met

hods

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

Alt

erna

tive

pla

ns a

re m

ade

duri

ng th

e la

unch

(usu

ally

in L

AU

6 or

LA

U8)

if p

roje

ct g

oals

cann

ot b

e m

et u

nder

the

give

n co

nstr

aint

s.

Alt

erna

tive

s ar

e pr

esen

ted

to m

anag

emen

t at

LA

U9.

P

Scr

ipts

: LA

U9

For

ms:

WE

EK

1.6.

Sel

ect s

olut

ions

fro

m th

e al

tern

ativ

es

base

d on

the

eval

uati

on c

rite

ria.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

Man

agem

ent c

hoos

es f

rom

am

ong

alte

rnat

e

plan

s m

ade

by th

e te

am b

ased

on

the

crit

eria

pres

ente

d du

ring

LA

U1.

P

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

13

5

9.1.

5 O

rgan

izat

ion

al E

nvi

ron

men

t fo

r In

teg

rati

on

– IP

PD

(O

EI)

The

Org

aniz

atio

n E

nvir

onm

ent f

or I

nteg

ratio

n (O

EI)

pro

cess

are

a es

tabl

ishe

s th

e ap

proa

ch a

nd e

nvir

onm

ent f

or th

e im

plem

enta

tion

of I

PPD

. The

en

viro

nmen

t is

esta

blis

hed

by o

btai

ning

, ada

ptin

g, o

r de

velo

ping

pro

cess

es th

at f

acili

tate

eff

ecti

ve in

tegr

ated

team

beh

avio

r, as

wel

l as

stak

ehol

der

com

mun

icat

ion

and

coll

abor

atio

n, c

reat

ing

the

orga

niza

tion’

s sh

ared

vis

ion,

and

man

agin

g pe

ople

to p

rom

ote

inte

grat

ive

beha

vior

. Spe

cifi

c pr

actic

es

of th

e O

EI

proc

ess

area

pro

mot

e bo

th te

am a

nd in

divi

dual

exc

elle

nce

whi

le e

nabl

ing

the

rew

ardi

ng in

tegr

atio

n ac

ross

all

busi

ness

and

tech

nica

l fu

ncti

ons

in th

e ex

ecut

ion

of th

e pr

ojec

ts.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

An

infr

astr

uctu

re t

hat

max

imiz

es

the

prod

ucti

vity

of

peop

le a

nd a

ffec

ts t

he

colla

bora

tion

nec

essa

ry f

or in

tegr

atio

n is

prov

ided

.

Scri

pts:

LA

U1

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

a sh

ared

vis

ion

for

the

orga

niza

tion

.

Oth

er:

Sen

ior

man

agem

ent

laun

ch

guid

elin

es

An

orga

niza

tion

al v

isio

n is

usu

ally

com

mun

icat

ed b

y se

nior

man

agem

ent a

t LA

U1.

The

team

lead

er is

res

pons

ible

for

rep

rese

ntin

g

man

agem

ent t

o th

e te

am th

roug

hout

the

proj

ect.

S

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

1.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

an in

tegr

ated

wor

k en

viro

nmen

t tha

t sup

port

s IP

PD

by

enab

ling

col

labo

ratio

n an

d co

ncur

rent

deve

lopm

ent.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Wor

k en

viro

nmen

t iss

ues

are

disc

usse

d w

ith

the

team

as

requ

ired

dur

ing

the

wee

kly

mee

ting

and

rais

ed w

ith

man

agem

ent d

urin

g st

atus

mee

ting

s.

S

136

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

RE

L

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

1.3.

Ide

ntif

y th

e un

ique

ski

lls

need

to

supp

ort t

he I

PP

D e

nvir

onm

ent.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

The

TS

P I

ntro

duct

ion

stra

tegy

iden

tifi

es a

port

ion

of th

e re

quir

ed tr

aini

ng a

nd th

e T

SP

(re)

laun

ch p

rovi

des

an o

pera

tiona

l exa

mpl

e th

at

supp

orts

the

IPP

D e

nvir

onm

ent.

S

SG2.

Peo

ple

are

man

aged

to

nurt

ure

the

inte

grat

ive

and

colla

bora

tive

beh

avio

rs o

f

an I

PP

D e

nvir

onm

ent.

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

RE

L, S

TA

TU

S

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

, tea

m

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

2.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

lead

ersh

ip

mec

hani

sms

to e

nabl

e ti

mel

y co

llab

orat

ion.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

Man

agem

ent i

s in

form

ed o

f pr

ojec

t sta

tus

and

issu

es th

at r

equi

re th

eir

atte

ntio

n on

a r

egul

ar

basi

s.

The

TS

P it

self

pro

vide

s m

echa

nism

s fo

r de

cisi

on

mak

ing,

del

egat

ion

of a

utho

rity

, and

rai

sing

and

com

mun

icat

ing

risk

s an

d is

sues

.

S

TS

P in

form

ally

sup

port

s th

is p

ract

ice.

2.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

ince

ntiv

es f

or

adop

ting

and

dem

onst

rati

ng in

tegr

ativ

e an

d

coll

abor

ativ

e be

havi

ors

at a

ll le

vels

of

the

orga

niza

tion

.

Scri

pt:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

TS

P in

form

ally

sup

port

s th

is p

ract

ice

wit

h

proc

edur

es f

or in

tegr

ated

rev

iew

s of

pro

ject

stat

us.

S

Ince

ntiv

es n

eed

not b

e fi

nanc

ial i

n na

ture

.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

13

7

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pt:

Lau

nch,

RE

L, L

AU

1,

WE

EK

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

SC

HE

DU

LE

,

WE

EK

2.3.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

orga

niza

tion

al

guid

elin

es to

bal

ance

team

and

hom

e

orga

niza

tion

res

pons

ibil

ities

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

The

TS

P p

roce

ss, e

spec

iall

y la

unch

es a

nd

peri

odic

rel

aunc

hes,

ena

bles

team

mem

bers

to

bala

nce

com

mit

men

ts b

y ex

plic

itly

fac

tori

ng in

the

“ava

ilab

ilit

y” o

f in

divi

dual

s to

add

ress

team

resp

onsi

bili

ties

.

S

TS

P in

form

ally

sup

port

s th

is p

ract

ice.

138

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

9.1.

6 C

ausa

l An

alys

is a

nd

Res

olu

tio

n (

CA

R)

Usi

ng th

e C

ausa

l Ana

lysi

s an

d R

esol

utio

n (C

AR

) pr

oces

s ar

ea, t

he p

roje

ct s

triv

es to

und

erst

and

the

com

mon

cau

ses

of v

aria

tion

inhe

rent

in

proc

esse

s an

d re

mov

e th

em f

rom

the

proj

ect’

s pr

oces

ses,

as

wel

l as

to u

se th

is k

now

ledg

e to

con

tinua

lly im

prov

e th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

proc

esse

s. B

oth

the

defi

ned

proc

esse

s an

d th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

set o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

are

targ

ets

of th

ese

impr

ovem

ent a

ctiv

ities

.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Roo

t ca

uses

of

defe

cts

and

othe

r

prob

lem

s ar

e sy

stem

atic

ally

det

erm

ined

.

Scri

pts:

PM

,

TE

ST

, TE

ST

1,

TE

ST

2, T

ES

T3,

TE

ST

D, P

IP

For

ms:

PIP

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

1.1.

Sel

ect t

he d

efec

ts a

nd o

ther

pro

blem

s

for

anal

ysis

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

TS

P s

crip

ts c

all f

or th

e an

alys

is o

f de

fect

s fo

und

afte

r un

it te

st. O

ther

pro

blem

s no

t rel

ated

to

defe

cts

are

not s

peci

fica

lly

addr

esse

d. P

roje

ct

orga

niza

tion

PIP

s m

ay a

lso

be s

elec

ted.

P

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

D

For

ms:

PIP

,

SU

MQ

, LO

GD

1.2.

Per

form

cau

sal a

naly

sis

of s

elec

ted

defe

cts

and

othe

r pr

oble

ms

and

prop

ose

acti

ons

to a

ddre

ss th

em.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

The

TE

ST

D s

crip

t is

used

to a

naly

ze d

efec

ts.

Oth

er p

robl

ems

not r

elat

ed to

def

ects

are

not

spec

ific

ally

add

ress

ed, b

ut m

ay b

e ha

ndle

d by

PIP

s an

d th

e ap

prop

riat

e ro

le m

anag

er.

D

In p

ract

ice,

the

TE

ST

D p

roce

ss is

use

d to

anal

yze

othe

r pr

oble

ms

iden

tifi

ed b

y P

IPs.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

13

9

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG2.

Roo

t ca

uses

of

defe

cts

and

othe

r

prob

lem

s ar

e sy

stem

atic

ally

add

ress

ed t

o

prev

ent

thei

r fu

ture

occ

urre

nce.

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

WE

EK

, PIP

For

ms:

PIP

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

2.1.

Im

plem

ent t

he s

elec

ted

acti

on

prop

osal

s th

at w

ere

deve

lope

d in

cau

sal

anal

ysis

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

PIP

s ar

e de

velo

ped

duri

ng th

e ex

ecut

ion

of th

e

proc

ess

scri

pts.

The

pro

cess

and

qua

lity

rol

e

man

ager

s re

view

the

PIP

s fo

r im

plem

enta

tion

into

the

proj

ect’

s an

d/or

org

aniz

atio

n’s

proc

esse

s.

D

The

PIP

impl

emen

tati

on p

roce

ss is

not

com

plet

ely

defi

ned

in th

e T

SP. R

ole

man

ager

mee

ting

s ac

ross

the

orga

niza

tion

,

for

exam

ple,

cou

ld a

ddre

ss th

e w

ides

prea

d

impl

emen

tati

on o

f P

IP s

ugge

stio

ns.

Scri

pts:

PM

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

, TS

P

indi

vidu

al a

nd

cons

olid

ated

wor

kboo

ks,

WE

EK

2.2.

Eva

luat

e th

e ef

fect

of

chan

ges

on

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

Pro

cess

and

def

ect d

ata

are

capt

ured

at t

he

indi

vidu

al le

vel a

nd c

onso

lida

ted

for

team

use

.

Tea

m p

erfo

rman

ce is

rev

iew

ed b

y th

e

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

and

by

the

enti

re te

am

at th

e w

eekl

y m

eeti

ng a

nd a

t the

pha

se o

r pr

ojec

t

post

mor

tem

.

D

140

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

D,

PM

For

ms:

MT

G,

PIP

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

2.3

Rec

ord

caus

al a

naly

sis

and

reso

lutio

n

data

for

use

acr

oss

the

proj

ect a

nd

orga

niza

tion

.

Oth

er:

NO

TE

BO

OK

Dat

a fr

om T

ES

TD

(fr

om th

e m

eeti

ng m

inut

es)

and

PIP

impl

emen

tati

on is

cap

ture

d an

d st

ored

in

the

proj

ect N

OT

EB

OO

K.

P

Ens

urin

g us

e of

the

data

acr

oss

the

orga

niza

tion

is o

ut o

f th

e sc

ope

of th

e T

SP.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

14

1

9.2

TS

P a

nd

Su

pp

ort

Cat

ego

ry G

ener

ic P

ract

ices

If

ther

e ar

e co

nsis

tent

pat

tern

s in

how

TSP

rel

ates

to g

ener

ic p

ract

ices

acr

oss

the

PAs

of th

e ot

her

proc

ess

cate

gori

es, t

here

see

ms

to b

e no

suc

h co

nsis

tenc

y in

how

TSP

rel

ates

to G

Ps a

cros

s th

e PA

s of

the

supp

ort c

ateg

ory.

Whe

re o

ne P

A m

ight

mir

ror

the

expl

icit

str

engt

hs o

f th

e pr

ojec

t m

anag

emen

t or

engi

neer

ing

GPs

, ano

ther

PA

may

hav

e a

mor

e te

nuou

s re

latio

nshi

p si

mil

ar to

the

proc

ess

cate

gory

. Als

o, m

any

supp

ort a

ctiv

itie

s ar

e pl

anne

d in

con

junc

tion

with

oth

er w

ork

item

s an

d th

us m

ay n

ot b

e sh

own

expl

icitl

y in

a p

roce

ss s

crip

t or

an in

divi

dual

dev

elop

er’s

TSP

wor

kboo

k.

The

se is

sues

mus

t be

cons

ider

ed b

y th

e E

PG o

r si

mila

r gr

oup

whe

n us

ing

this

info

rmat

ion

to g

uide

a d

evel

opm

ent e

ffor

t or

prep

are

for

a SC

AM

PI

appr

aisa

l.

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

GP

2.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

an

orga

niza

tion

al p

olic

y fo

r pl

anni

ng a

nd

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

A

ll S

uppo

rt P

As

Out

of

the

scop

e of

TS

P.

U

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6,

RE

L

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

GP

2.2

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

plan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

Oth

er:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R

All

: D

urin

g th

e T

SP la

unch

, pla

ns a

re e

stab

lish

ed f

or v

ario

us p

roje

ct p

roce

sses

. Wit

h th

e ex

cept

ion

of

som

e as

pect

s of

CM

and

per

haps

PP

QA

, the

se P

As

are

not e

xpli

citly

add

ress

ed. H

owev

er, t

he la

unch

proc

ess

can

pote

ntia

lly

addr

ess

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

and

pro

vide

a m

eans

for

com

plet

ing

the

plan

ning

proc

ess.

DA

R:

To

the

exte

nt th

at th

e T

SP la

unch

is a

n ap

plic

atio

n of

the

DA

R p

roce

ss, t

he la

unch

pre

para

tion

acti

viti

es e

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n a

plan

for

dec

isio

n an

alys

is a

nd r

esol

utio

n fo

r pr

ojec

t pla

nnin

g. S

ee

Sec

tion

9.1

.4 a

bove

.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U6

GP

2.3

. Pro

vide

res

ourc

es f

or p

erfo

rmin

g

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts,

and

prov

idin

g th

e se

rvic

es o

f th

e pr

oces

s.

For

ms:

SU

MS,

TA

SK

All

: T

he te

am le

ader

and

init

ial t

eam

mem

ber

assi

gnm

ents

are

mad

e as

par

t of

laun

ch p

repa

rati

on.

Res

ourc

es a

re a

ssig

ned

to p

roje

ct ta

sks

duri

ng M

eeti

ng 6

of

the

laun

ch. T

he te

am le

ader

and

rol

e

man

ager

s he

lp e

nsur

e th

at th

e ta

sks

are

prop

erly

sta

ffed

.

S

142

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

Oth

er:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R

Scri

pts:

LA

U2,

LA

U3,

LA

U6

For

ms:

TA

SK

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

plan

ning

and

supp

ort m

anag

er

GP

2.4

. Ass

ign

resp

onsi

bili

ty a

nd a

utho

rity

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, a

nd p

rovi

ding

the

serv

ices

of th

e pr

oces

s.

Oth

er:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R

All

: T

he te

am le

ader

is a

ssig

ned

duri

ng la

unch

pre

para

tion

. Rol

es a

re e

stab

lish

ed d

urin

g L

AU

2.

Spe

cifi

c ta

sk r

espo

nsib

ilit

ies

are

assi

gned

to p

roje

ct ta

sks

duri

ng L

AU

6. T

he te

am le

ader

and

rol

e

man

ager

s he

lp e

nsur

e th

at th

e ta

sks

are

prop

erly

sta

ffed

.

CM

: P

roje

ct C

CB

res

pons

ibili

ties

are

assi

gned

in L

AU

3. T

he s

uppo

rt m

anag

er h

as s

peci

fic

resp

onsi

bili

ty f

or th

e ch

ange

con

trol

sys

tem

and

hea

ds th

e C

CB

.

MA

: T

he c

aptu

re o

f th

e ba

se T

SP

mea

sure

s is

the

resp

onsi

bly

of a

ll te

am m

embe

rs. T

he p

lann

ing

man

ager

has

spe

cifi

c re

spon

sibi

lity

to c

onso

lida

te th

e T

SP w

orkb

ooks

and

mai

ntai

n th

e pr

ojec

t

NO

TE

BO

OK

.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

GP

2.5

. Tra

in th

e pe

ople

per

form

ing

or

supp

ortin

g th

e pr

oces

s as

nee

ded.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

All

: T

he T

SP

laun

ch p

rovi

des

a m

eans

of

plan

ning

all

req

uire

d tr

aini

ng f

or te

am m

embe

rs to

per

form

thei

r ta

sks.

The

laun

ch p

roce

ss a

nd T

SP

tool

and

pro

cess

trai

ning

pro

vide

s th

e te

am w

ith

a co

mm

on

basi

s fo

r m

anag

ing

thei

r ta

sks,

incl

udin

g th

e ca

ptur

e of

the

mea

sure

s re

quir

ed b

y th

e pr

ojec

t.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

14

3

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

LA

U

For

ms:

TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

GP

2.6

. Pla

ce d

esig

nate

d w

ork

prod

ucts

of

the

proc

ess

unde

r ap

prop

riat

e le

vels

of

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t.

Oth

er:

Pro

ject

NO

TE

BO

OK

All

: A

ll e

lem

ents

of

plan

ning

, mon

itor

ing,

and

con

trol

ling

the

proj

ect a

re c

aptu

red

duri

ng th

e la

unch

proc

ess

and

in th

e da

ily

acti

viti

es o

f th

e te

am m

embe

rs. A

ll o

f th

ese

item

s ar

e ca

ptur

ed a

t lea

st

wee

kly

in th

e pr

ojec

t NO

TE

BO

OK

.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U9,

WE

EK

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

GP

2.7

. Ide

ntif

y an

d in

volv

e th

e re

leva

nt

stak

ehol

ders

as

plan

ned.

Oth

er:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R,

ST

AT

US

All

: D

urin

g th

e pr

epar

atio

n fo

r a

laun

ch, t

he s

take

hold

ers

are

iden

tifie

d, a

nd th

ey u

sual

ly p

arti

cipa

te

in L

AU

1 an

d L

AU

9. T

he s

take

hold

ers

are

info

rmed

of

proj

ect s

tatu

s th

roug

h th

e in

tera

ctio

n w

ith

the

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

and

pro

ject

sta

tus

repo

rtin

g m

echa

nism

s.

S

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

, IT

L

For

ms:

WE

EK

GP

2.8

. Mon

itor

and

con

trol

the

proc

ess

agai

nst t

he p

lan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

and

take

app

ropr

iate

cor

rect

ive

acti

on.

Rol

es: T

SP

coac

h, te

am

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

All

: T

he T

SP

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

(W

EE

K)

and

wee

kly

ST

AT

US

rep

ort p

rovi

de c

lose

mon

itor

ing

of

the

team

’s s

tatu

s. A

ny a

ctiv

itie

s th

at a

re m

ore

than

a w

eek

past

thei

r du

e da

te a

re u

sual

ly p

rovi

ded

spec

ial a

tten

tion

. The

team

lead

er a

nd r

ole

man

ager

s te

nd to

trac

k “n

on-e

ngin

eeri

ng”

item

s cl

osel

y,

ofte

n as

pro

ject

ris

ks.

S

144

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Oth

er:

ST

AT

US

,

quar

terl

y re

view

chec

klis

t

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

IRT

L

GP

2.9

. Obj

ecti

vely

eva

luat

e ad

here

nce

of

the

proc

ess

agai

nst i

ts p

roce

ss d

escr

ipti

on,

stan

dard

s, a

nd p

roce

dure

s, a

nd a

ddre

ss

nonc

ompl

ianc

e.

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

man

ager

All

: T

he p

roce

ss m

anag

er a

nd/o

r su

ppor

t man

ager

rol

es a

re g

ener

ally

acc

ount

able

and

oft

en d

irec

tly

resp

onsi

ble

for

ensu

ring

that

act

ivit

ies

take

pla

ce f

or th

e pr

ojec

t. T

he te

am r

evie

ws

proc

ess

nonc

onfo

rman

ce a

nd p

roce

ss im

prov

emen

t pro

posa

ls a

t tea

m m

eeti

ngs.

S

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er

GP

2.1

0. R

evie

w th

e ac

tivi

ties

, sta

tus,

and

resu

lts

of th

e pr

oces

s w

ith

high

er le

vel

man

agem

ent a

nd r

esol

ve is

sues

.

Oth

er:

ST

AT

US

,

quar

terl

y re

view

chec

klis

t

All

: T

he te

am le

ader

rev

iew

s pr

ojec

t pro

gres

s w

eekl

y w

ith

the

team

and

app

ropr

iate

cor

rect

ive

acti

ons

are

dete

rmin

ed a

nd e

xecu

ted.

Sta

tus

repo

rts

are

prov

ided

to m

anag

emen

t fro

m th

ese

mee

ting

s.

The

pro

ject

sta

tus

is a

lso

revi

ewed

wit

h se

nior

man

agem

ent a

t the

qua

rter

ly p

roje

ct r

evie

w.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

PIP

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

PIP

GP

3.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

desc

ript

ion

of a

def

ined

pro

cess

.

Rol

es: R

ole

man

ager

s

All

: D

urin

g a

TS

P la

unch

, the

team

def

ines

and

/or

agre

es to

the

proc

esse

s th

at th

ey w

ill u

se d

urin

g

that

por

tion

of th

e pr

ojec

t. O

ccas

iona

lly a

dditi

onal

pro

cess

es n

eed

to b

e de

fine

d, e

spec

ially

for

mat

ters

invo

lvin

g th

e su

ppor

t PA

s. T

he r

elev

ant r

ole

man

ager

ens

ures

that

they

are

def

ined

and

agre

ed to

by

the

team

.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

14

5

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

PM

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

PIP

GP

3.2

. Col

lect

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, m

easu

res,

mea

sure

men

t res

ults

, and

impr

ovem

ent

info

rmat

ion

deri

ved

from

pla

nnin

g an

d

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

to s

uppo

rt th

e fu

ture

use

and

impr

ovem

ent o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oces

s as

sets

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

All

: P

roje

ct d

ata

and

arti

fact

s ar

e co

llec

ted

for

all t

asks

def

ined

dur

ing

the

laun

ch. P

IPs

are

wri

tten

as

need

ed d

urin

g th

e pr

ojec

t and

dur

ing

post

mor

tem

s.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U2

For

ms:

GO

AL

GP

4.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

quan

tita

tive

obje

ctiv

es f

or th

e pr

oces

s th

at a

ddre

ss

qual

ity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

bas

ed o

n

cust

omer

nee

ds a

nd b

usin

ess

obje

ctiv

es.

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber

All

: Q

uant

itat

ive

obje

ctiv

es f

or s

uppo

rt a

ctiv

itie

s w

ill t

ypic

ally

be

spec

ifie

d du

ring

the

laun

ch

(LA

U2)

onl

y if

ther

e is

som

e re

ason

to b

elie

ve th

at s

uch

obje

ctiv

es a

re n

eces

sary

to e

nsur

e th

e qu

ality

and

the

tim

ely

and

cost

-eff

ecti

ve d

eliv

ery

of th

e pr

ojec

t’s

mai

n pr

oduc

t. In

this

cas

e, a

n ap

prop

riat

e

role

man

ager

is a

ssig

ned

to tr

ack

thes

e ob

ject

ives

.

S

Scri

pts:

For

ms:

SU

MS,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

GP

4.2

. Sta

bili

ze th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f on

e or

mor

e su

bpro

cess

es to

det

erm

ine

the

abil

ity

of th

e pr

oces

s to

ach

ieve

the

esta

blis

hed

quan

titat

ive

qual

ity

and

proc

ess-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves.

R

oles

: Rol

e

man

ager

s

All

: T

SP te

ams

coll

ect d

ata

(SU

MS

, TA

SK

, LO

GT

, LO

GD

) to

ana

lyze

thei

r pe

rfor

man

ce a

nd to

mee

t

the

proj

ects

and

org

aniz

atio

nal g

oals

. As

wit

h G

P 4

.1 a

bove

, the

team

wil

l typ

ical

ly p

ay a

tten

tion

to

this

dat

a fo

r su

ppor

t act

ivit

ies

if it

aff

ects

the

qual

ity

and/

or th

e ti

mel

y an

d co

st-e

ffec

tive

deli

very

of

the

proj

ect’

s m

ain

prod

uct.

S

Scri

pts:

PM

For

ms:

PIP

GP

5.1

. Ens

ure

cont

inuo

us im

prov

emen

t of

the

proc

ess

in f

ulfi

llin

g th

e re

leva

nt

busi

ness

obj

ecti

ves

of th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss

man

ager

All

: W

hile

the

TSP

foc

uses

on

the

team

and

not

on

the

orga

niza

tiona

l asp

ect o

f th

is p

ract

ice,

cont

inuo

us im

prov

emen

t of

the

proj

ect’

s pr

oces

ses

and

perf

orm

ance

is p

art o

f th

e w

ay T

SP

team

s

func

tion

. Dat

a ar

e ga

ther

ed a

nd a

naly

zed

and

proc

ess

impr

ovem

ent p

ropo

sals

are

dra

fted

, rev

iew

ed,

and

impl

emen

ted

as th

e te

am s

triv

es to

mee

t its

com

mit

men

ts a

nd g

oals

. The

se e

ffor

ts c

an e

asil

y be

roll

ed in

to a

n or

gani

zati

onal

vie

w.

S

146

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Pro

cess

Are

as

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

TE

STD

For

ms:

PIP

,

TS

P w

orkb

ook

(SU

MP

, SU

MQ

,

stat

us a

nd

qual

ity

char

ts)

GP

5.2

. Ide

ntif

y an

d co

rrec

t the

roo

t cau

ses

of d

efec

ts a

nd o

ther

pro

blem

s in

the

proc

ess.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss

and

qual

ity

man

ager

s

All

: T

SP te

ams

coll

ect d

ata

to s

uppo

rt th

e id

enti

fica

tion

and

ana

lysi

s of

pro

ject

-rel

ated

pro

blem

s.

Tea

m m

embe

rs p

erfo

rm a

naly

sis

of th

eir

own

and

team

dat

a to

iden

tify

pro

blem

s an

d to

pro

pose

proc

ess

impr

ovem

ents

. Roo

t cau

se a

naly

sis

mee

ting

s ar

e he

ld a

s ne

cess

ary

over

a w

ide

rang

e of

issu

es.

S

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 147

10 Summary

The results documented in this report show clearly that TSP can instantiate a majority of the project-oriented specific practices of CMMI. In addition, many of the organization-oriented specific and generic practices of the model are supported at various levels by TSP practices. One must remember, however, that this is an idealized case, a paper exercise intended to guide the efforts of a process group when implementing TSP within the larger context of CMMI-based process improvement.

For this analysis to be useful in practical terms, the implementing group must take into account the realities of their unique situation, including the size and duration of typical projects, what and how to adapt to project sizes and durations at the limits of the usual variation, and what and how to adapt to the processes implemented outside the scope of single projects. TSP has seen significant successes at dramatically improving the results of individual projects, but the business of CMMI is improving the results of all projects in an organization. Working together, these two technologies hold the promise of rapid, measurable, and sustainable process improvement beyond the immediate reach of one or the other.

148 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 149

Appendix A: Supplier Management Process Areas

While the TSP does not directly address the Supplier Management activities, with a little thought, the practices from its two process areas can be planned, monitored, and analyzed using the TSP practices and principles. In general, the “Observation” column in the tables below indicates likely behavior by an experienced TSP team in dealing with potential and actual suppliers and the products and product components acquired from such suppliers.

Figure 10 shows the percentage of Supplier Management specific practices addressed by TSP for each PA. For detailed observations of each PA, see below.

Supplier Management

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

SAM ISM

Process Area

Perc

ent

of P

ract

ices

UnratedNot Addressed

Partially AddressedSupportedDirectly Addressed

Figure 10: TSP Practices Profile for Supplier Management Process Areas

150

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Su

pp

lier

Ag

reem

ent

Man

agem

ent

(SA

M)

The

Sup

plie

r Agr

eem

ent M

anag

emen

t (SA

M)

proc

ess

area

add

ress

es th

e ne

ed o

f th

e pr

ojec

t to

effe

ctiv

ely

acqu

ire

thos

e po

rtio

ns o

f w

ork

that

are

pr

oduc

ed b

y su

pplie

rs. O

nce

a pr

oduc

t com

pone

nt is

iden

tifie

d an

d th

e su

pplie

r w

ho w

ill p

rodu

ce it

is s

elec

ted,

a s

uppl

ier

agre

emen

t tha

t wil

l be

used

to m

anag

e th

e su

pplie

r is

est

ablis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

The

sup

plie

r’s

prog

ress

and

per

form

ance

are

mon

itore

d. A

ccep

tanc

e re

view

s an

d te

sts

are

cond

ucte

d on

the

supp

lier-

prod

uced

pro

duct

com

pone

nt.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Agr

eem

ents

wit

h th

e su

pplie

rs a

re

esta

blis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

LA

U7,

LA

U8,

HL

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.1.

Det

erm

ine

the

type

of

acqu

isit

ion

for

each

pro

duct

or

prod

uct c

ompo

nent

to b

e

acqu

ired

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, d

esig

n

man

ager

Man

agem

ent d

irec

tive

(L

AU

1), t

he d

evel

opm

ent

stra

tegy

(L

AU

3), t

he n

eed

to d

evel

op a

lter

nati

ve

solu

tions

(L

AU

4, L

AU

6, L

AU

8), o

r ri

sk

mit

igat

ion

(LA

U7)

for

the

proj

ect m

ay d

eter

min

e

a ne

ed f

or a

n ou

tsid

e su

ppli

er. T

he d

esig

n

man

ager

wou

ld b

e re

spon

sibl

e fo

r H

LD

act

ivit

ies

to d

eter

min

e w

hich

pro

duct

s or

com

pone

nts

wou

ld b

e bu

ilt b

y or

obt

aine

d fr

om a

sup

plie

r.

The

team

lead

er w

ould

be

invo

lved

in d

ecis

ions

to d

eter

min

e ac

quis

itio

n ty

pe.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

LA

U7

1.2

Sel

ect s

uppl

iers

bas

ed o

n an

eva

luat

ion

of th

eir

abil

ity

to m

eet t

he s

peci

fied

requ

irem

ents

and

est

abli

shed

cri

teri

a.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

If a

sup

plie

r is

nee

ded,

task

s to

det

erm

ine

viab

le

supp

liers

wou

ld b

e pl

aced

in th

e te

am’s

pro

ject

plan

(L

AU

4, T

AS

K, L

AU

6, a

nd L

AU

7) a

nd

mon

itore

d (T

AS

K, L

OG

T, L

OG

D).

The

team

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

15

1

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, s

uppo

rt

man

ager

lead

er a

nd d

esig

n m

anag

er, a

t a m

inim

um, w

ould

like

ly b

e in

volv

ed in

sup

plie

r se

lect

ion.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.3

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

form

al

agre

emen

ts w

ith

the

supp

lier

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, s

uppo

rt

man

ager

If a

sup

plie

r is

nee

ded,

task

s to

det

erm

ine

viab

le

supp

liers

wou

ld b

e pl

aced

in th

e te

am’s

pro

ject

plan

(L

AU

4, T

AS

K, L

AU

6, a

nd L

AU

7) a

nd

mon

itore

d (T

AS

K, L

OG

T, L

OG

D).

The

team

lead

er o

r su

ppor

t man

ager

is ty

pica

lly

resp

onsi

ble

for

mon

itor

ing

such

act

ivit

ies

for

the

team

.

D

SG2.

Agr

eem

ents

wit

h th

e su

pplie

rs a

re

sati

sfie

d by

bot

h th

e pr

ojec

t an

d th

e

supp

lier.

Scri

pts:

HL

D,

IMP

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.1.

Rev

iew

can

dida

te C

OT

S p

rodu

cts

to

ensu

re th

ey s

atis

fy th

e sp

ecif

ied

requ

irem

ents

that

are

cov

ered

und

er th

e

supp

lier

agre

emen

t.

Rol

es:

Des

ign

and

impl

emen

tati

on

man

ager

s

Indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

wou

ld li

kely

incl

ude

inve

stig

atio

ns o

f C

OT

S p

rodu

cts

and

wou

ld b

e

trac

ked

in in

divi

dual

wor

kboo

ks. T

ailo

red

vers

ions

of

HL

D a

nd/o

r IM

P w

ould

ref

lect

a

cust

omiz

ed d

esig

n ap

proa

ch. T

he d

esig

n or

impl

emen

tati

on m

anag

ers

wou

ld ty

pica

lly

lead

or c

oord

inat

e su

ch a

ctiv

itie

s.

D

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

2.2

Per

form

act

ivit

ies

wit

h th

e su

ppli

er a

s

spec

ifie

d in

the

supp

lier

agr

eem

ent.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

The

sup

plie

r ag

reem

ent a

ctiv

itie

s w

ould

be

refl

ecte

d in

one

or

mor

e T

AS

K p

lans

and

refl

ecte

d in

the

corr

espo

ndin

g T

SP

wor

kboo

ks.

Sig

nifi

cant

act

ivit

ies

wou

ld b

e re

port

ed b

y on

e

D

152

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Rol

es:

Tea

m

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

or m

ore

team

mem

bers

in th

e w

eekl

y m

eeti

ng

(WE

EK

), o

ften

in c

onju

ncti

on w

ith

one

or m

ore

of th

e ro

le m

anag

er f

unct

ions

. Pro

blem

s an

d

mil

esto

nes

wou

ld li

kely

be

repo

rted

dur

ing

the

wee

kly

ST

AT

US

mee

ting.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

, IM

P

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.3

Ens

ure

that

the

supp

lier

agr

eem

ent i

s

sati

sfie

d be

fore

acc

epti

ng th

e ac

quir

ed

prod

uct.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

Tas

ks f

or te

stin

g of

sup

plie

r pr

oduc

ts w

ould

be

refl

ecte

d in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

, pro

babl

y

duri

ng a

n im

plem

enta

tion

pha

se (

IMP

), a

nd

trac

ked

in th

e T

SP w

orkb

ooks

. Sta

tus

of th

ose

task

s w

ould

be

revi

ewed

in th

e w

eekl

y te

am

mee

ting

(W

EE

K)

and

ST

AT

US

mee

ting

. The

vari

ous

affe

cted

rol

e m

anag

ers

wou

ld li

kely

be

invo

lved

. The

team

lead

er ty

pica

lly

has

fina

l

appr

oval

aut

hori

ty.

D

Scri

pts:

IM

P,

TE

ST

1, T

ES

T2

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.4

Tra

nsit

ion

the

acqu

ired

pro

duct

s fr

om

the

supp

lier

to th

e pr

ojec

t.

Rol

es:

Tes

t and

impl

emen

tati

on

man

ager

s

Thi

s w

ould

typi

call

y be

an

impl

emen

tati

on

(IM

P)

or b

uild

/int

egra

tion

(T

ES

T1,

TE

ST

2)

acti

vity

ref

lect

ed in

one

or

mor

e T

AS

K p

lans

and

trac

ked

in th

e T

SP w

orkb

ook.

The

impl

emen

tati

on o

r te

st m

anag

er w

ould

take

resp

onsi

bili

ty f

or c

ompl

etio

n of

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

15

3

Inte

gra

ted

Su

pp

lier

Man

agem

ent

(IS

M)

The

Int

egra

ted

Supp

lier

Man

agem

ent (

ISM

) pr

oces

s pr

oact

ivel

y id

entif

ies

sour

ces

of p

rodu

cts

that

may

be

used

to s

atis

fy p

roje

ct r

equi

rem

ents

and

m

onit

ors

the

sele

cted

sup

plie

r’s

wor

k pr

oduc

ts a

nd p

roce

sses

, whi

le m

aint

aini

ng a

coo

pera

tive

pro

ject

-sup

plie

r re

lati

onsh

ip. T

he s

peci

fic

prac

tices

of

the

Inte

grat

ed S

uppl

ier

Man

agem

ent p

roce

ss a

rea

cove

r se

lect

ing

pote

ntia

l sou

rces

of

prod

ucts

, eva

luat

ing

thos

e so

urce

s to

sel

ect s

uppl

iers

, m

onit

orin

g se

lect

ed s

uppl

ier

proc

esse

s an

d w

ork

prod

ucts

, and

rev

isin

g th

e su

pplie

r ag

reem

ent o

r re

lati

onsh

ip a

s ap

prop

riat

e. T

he I

nteg

rate

d Su

pplie

r M

anag

emen

t pro

cess

are

a w

orks

clo

sely

wit

h th

e Su

pplie

r Agr

eem

ent M

anag

emen

t pro

cess

are

a du

ring

the

supp

lier

sele

ctio

n pr

oces

s.

Inte

grat

ed S

uppl

ier

Man

agem

ent a

lso

shar

es m

onit

orin

g in

form

atio

n w

ith th

e E

ngin

eeri

ng a

nd S

uppo

rt p

roce

ss a

reas

in th

e fo

rm o

f te

chni

cal

solu

tion

, pro

duct

inte

grat

ion,

and

val

idat

ion

data

, as

wel

l as

proc

ess

and

prod

uct q

ualit

y as

sura

nce

and

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t dat

a.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Pot

enti

al s

ourc

es o

f pr

oduc

ts t

hat

best

fit

the

nee

ds o

f th

e pr

ojec

t ar

e

iden

tifi

ed, a

naly

zed,

and

sel

ecte

d.

Scri

pts:

RE

Q,

HL

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

1.1.

Ide

ntif

y an

d an

alyz

e po

tent

ial s

ourc

es

of p

rodu

cts

that

may

be

used

to s

atis

fy th

e

proj

ect’

s re

quir

emen

ts.

Rol

es:

Cus

tom

er

inte

rfac

e an

d

desi

gn m

anag

ers

The

cus

tom

er in

terf

ace

and/

or d

esig

n m

anag

ers

wou

ld li

kely

take

the

lead

in th

ese

acti

viti

es

duri

ng r

equi

rem

ents

dev

elop

men

t (R

EQ

) or

high

-lev

el d

esig

n (H

LD

). T

asks

wou

ld b

e

refl

ecte

d in

one

or

mor

e in

divi

dual

TA

SK

pla

ns

and

trac

ked

in th

e T

SP w

orkb

ooks

.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U3

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

1.2

Use

a f

orm

al e

valu

atio

n pr

oces

s to

dete

rmin

e w

hich

sou

rces

of

cust

om-m

ade

and

off-

the-

shel

f pr

oduc

ts to

use

.

Rol

es:

Pro

cess

and

desi

gn

man

ager

The

des

ign

man

ager

wou

ld id

entif

y th

e ne

ed f

or

such

a p

roce

ss (

LA

U3)

and

late

r le

ad it

s cr

eati

on

and

usag

e. T

he p

roce

ss m

anag

er w

ould

ens

ure

that

it is

doc

umen

ted

prop

erly

and

use

d to

cre

ate

indi

vidu

al ta

sks

(TA

SK

). T

he ta

sks

wou

ld b

e

trac

ked

in th

e T

SP w

orkb

ooks

.

D

Thi

s is

a g

ood

oppo

rtun

ity

for

the

desi

gn

man

ager

to d

efin

e an

d us

e D

ecis

ion

Ana

lysi

s an

d R

esol

utio

n (D

AR

) pr

inci

ples

to d

efin

e an

eva

luat

ion

proc

ess.

154

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG2.

Wor

k is

coo

rdin

ated

wit

h su

pplie

rs

to e

nsur

e th

e su

pplie

r ag

reem

ent

is

exec

uted

app

ropr

iate

ly.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

, PM

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.1.

Mon

itor

and

anal

yze

sele

cted

pro

cess

es

used

by

the

supp

lier

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

Sup

plie

r st

atus

and

pro

gres

s w

ould

be

revi

ewed

at th

e w

eekl

y te

am m

eeti

ng (

WE

EK

, ST

AT

US)

and

revi

ewed

wit

h se

nior

man

agem

ent.

Any

in-

proj

ect m

onit

orin

g an

d an

alys

is o

f su

ppli

er

proc

esse

s w

ould

like

ly b

e co

ordi

nate

d th

roug

h

the

team

lead

er a

nd o

ne o

r m

ore

role

man

ager

s.

Dur

ing

the

proj

ect p

ostm

orte

m (

PM

), s

uppl

ier

perf

orm

ance

wou

ld a

lso

be a

naly

zed.

D

Scri

pts:

IM

P,

TE

ST

1, T

ES

T2

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.2

For

cus

tom

-mad

e pr

oduc

ts, e

valu

ate

sele

cted

sup

plie

r w

ork

prod

ucts

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

est,

and

impl

emen

tati

on

man

ager

s

Eva

luat

ions

wou

ld ty

pica

lly

take

pla

ce in

an

impl

emen

tati

on (

IMP

), b

uild

(T

ES

T1)

, or

inte

grat

ion

(TE

ST

2) p

hase

, ref

lect

ed in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

, and

trac

ked

in in

divi

dual

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

. The

impl

emen

tati

on a

nd/o

r te

st

man

ager

s w

ould

lead

the

eval

uati

on.

D

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.3

Rev

ise

the

supp

lier

agr

eem

ent o

r

rela

tion

ship

, as

appr

opri

ate,

to r

efle

ct

chan

ges

in c

ondi

tions

. R

oles

: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

If r

equi

red,

suc

h ta

sks

wou

ld li

kely

fal

l to

the

team

lead

er, u

nles

s th

ey b

ecam

e fr

eque

nt e

noug

h

to b

e re

duce

d to

rou

tine.

In

this

cas

e, th

ey w

ould

like

ly f

all t

o on

e of

the

role

man

ager

s an

d be

refl

ecte

d in

one

or

mor

e in

divi

dual

TA

SK

pla

ns

and

trac

ked

in th

e T

SP w

orkb

ook.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

15

5

TS

P a

nd

Su

pp

lier

Man

agem

ent

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

es

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

GP

2.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

an

orga

niza

tion

al p

olic

y fo

r pl

anni

ng a

nd

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

O

ut o

f th

e sc

ope

of T

SP

. U

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U6,

WE

EK

GP

2.2

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

plan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

For

ms:

TA

SK

Nee

ded

proc

esse

s ar

e id

enti

fied

in L

AU

3, s

izes

and

eff

orts

of

acti

viti

es a

re

esti

mat

ed in

LA

U4,

and

act

ivit

ies

are

assi

gned

in L

AU

6 an

d re

flec

ted

in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U6

GP

2.3

. Pro

vide

res

ourc

es f

or p

erfo

rmin

g

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts,

and

prov

idin

g th

e se

rvic

es o

f th

e pr

oces

s.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

SU

MS

Res

ourc

es a

re a

ssig

ned

to p

roje

ct ta

sks

duri

ng M

eeti

ng 6

of

the

laun

ch

(TA

SK

, SU

MS

, and

LA

U6)

. The

team

lead

er a

nd r

ole

man

ager

s he

lp to

ensu

re th

at th

e ta

sks

are

prop

erly

sta

ffed

.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U2,

LA

U6

For

ms:

TA

SK

GP

2.4

. Ass

ign

resp

onsi

bili

ty a

nd a

utho

rity

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, a

nd p

rovi

ding

the

serv

ices

of th

e pr

oces

s.

Rol

es: R

ole

man

ager

s

Rol

e re

spon

sibi

litie

s ar

e as

sign

ed d

urin

g L

AU

2, a

nd in

divi

dual

pro

ject

task

s

are

assi

gned

dur

ing

Mee

ting

6 of

the

laun

ch (

LA

U6)

and

cap

ture

d on

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K f

orm

s.

S

GP

2.5

. Tra

in th

e pe

ople

per

form

ing

or

supp

ortin

g th

e pr

oces

s as

nee

ded.

Tra

inin

g:

Intr

oduc

tion

to

Per

sona

l

Pro

cess

, spe

cifi

c

TS

P p

roce

ss a

nd

tool

trai

ning

Whi

le s

peci

fic

trai

ning

in s

uppl

ier

issu

es is

not

par

t of

PSP

and

TSP

trai

ning

, the

Int

rodu

ctio

n to

Per

sona

l Pro

cess

cou

rse

may

be

help

ful i

n

intr

oduc

ing

a de

fine

d, p

lann

ed, a

nd m

easu

red

proc

ess

into

a s

uppl

ier

rela

tion

ship

.

S

156

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

1,

TE

ST

2

GP

2.6

. Pla

ce d

esig

nate

d w

ork

prod

ucts

of

the

proc

ess

unde

r ap

prop

riat

e le

vels

of

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t. R

oles

: Pro

cess

man

ager

TE

ST

1 an

d T

ES

T2

desi

gnat

e up

date

s in

con

figu

rati

on m

anag

emen

t tha

t

wou

ld p

resu

mab

ly in

clud

e an

y pr

oduc

ts o

r pr

oduc

t com

pone

nts

acqu

ired

from

sup

plie

rs a

nd b

uilt

or in

tegr

ated

thro

ugh

the

test

ing

proc

esse

s. T

he

proc

ess

man

ager

is r

espo

nsib

le f

or e

nsur

ing

that

rel

evan

t pro

cess

es a

re

prop

erly

doc

umen

ted

and

cont

rolle

d.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U9,

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

GP

2.7

. Ide

ntif

y an

d in

volv

e th

e re

leva

nt

stak

ehol

ders

as

plan

ned.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

Dur

ing

the

prep

arat

ion

for

a (r

e)la

unch

, the

sta

keho

lder

s ar

e id

entif

ied,

and

they

usu

ally

par

tici

pate

in L

AU

1 an

d L

AU

9. T

he s

take

hold

ers

are

info

rmed

of p

roje

ct s

tatu

s th

roug

h in

tera

ctio

n w

ith

the

team

lead

er o

r ap

prop

riat

e ro

le

man

ager

and

thro

ugh

the

proj

ect s

tatu

s re

port

ing

mec

hani

sms

(WE

EK

or,

mor

e lik

ely,

ST

AT

US

).

S

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

GP

2.8

. Mon

itor

and

con

trol

the

proc

ess

agai

nst t

he p

lan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

and

take

app

ropr

iate

cor

rect

ive

acti

on.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

Sig

nifi

cant

sup

plie

r ac

tivi

ties

are

rep

orte

d to

the

team

at l

east

wee

kly

by th

e

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

at t

he w

eekl

y te

am m

eeti

ng (

WE

EK

). I

mpo

rtan

t

stat

us a

nd r

isks

are

rep

orte

d up

the

chai

n of

com

man

d by

the

team

lead

er

(ST

AT

US

and

qua

rter

ly r

evie

w).

The

TS

P c

oach

may

als

o m

onit

or th

e

proc

esse

s fo

r su

ppli

er in

tera

ctio

ns, e

valu

ate

resu

lts,

and

sug

gest

impr

ovem

ents

.

S

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

For

ms:

PIP

,

WE

EK

GP

2.9

. Obj

ecti

vely

eva

luat

e ad

here

nce

of

the

proc

ess

agai

nst i

ts p

roce

ss d

escr

ipti

on,

stan

dard

s, a

nd p

roce

dure

s, a

nd a

ddre

ss

nonc

ompl

ianc

e.

Rol

es: P

roce

ss

man

ager

The

pro

cess

man

ager

or

the

resp

onsi

ble

role

man

ager

is g

ener

ally

acco

unta

ble

for

enac

ting

pro

cess

es in

volv

ing

the

supp

lier

. The

team

rev

iew

s

proc

ess

issu

es a

nd p

roce

ss im

prov

emen

t pro

posa

ls (

PIP

s) a

t tea

m m

eeti

ngs

(WE

EK

) an

d pr

obab

ly in

pos

tmor

tem

s as

wel

l if

the

issu

es s

igni

fica

ntly

affe

ct a

ttai

nmen

t of

team

goa

ls.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

15

7

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

GP

2.1

0. R

evie

w th

e ac

tivi

ties

, sta

tus,

and

resu

lts

of th

e pr

oces

s w

ith

high

er le

vel

man

agem

ent a

nd r

esol

ve is

sues

.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

The

pro

ject

rev

iew

s pr

ogre

ss w

eekl

y w

ith

the

team

and

app

ropr

iate

corr

ecti

ve a

ctio

ns a

re d

eter

min

ed a

nd e

xecu

ted

(WE

EK

). S

TA

TU

S r

epor

ts

are

prov

ided

to m

anag

emen

t fro

m th

ese

mee

ting

s. T

he p

roje

ct s

tatu

s is

als

o

revi

ewed

wit

h se

nior

man

agem

ent a

t the

qua

rter

ly p

roje

ct r

evie

w.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

PIP

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

,

PIP

GP

3.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

desc

ript

ion

of a

def

ined

pro

cess

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

Dur

ing

a T

SP

laun

ch, t

he te

am d

efin

es it

s ow

n pr

oces

ses,

or

the

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

agr

ees

to a

cqui

re o

r de

velo

p th

e pr

oces

ses

that

the

team

wil

l

use

duri

ng th

at p

orti

on o

f th

e pr

ojec

t (L

AU

3). O

ccas

iona

lly,

add

itio

nal

proc

esse

s m

ay n

eed

to b

e de

fine

d; in

this

cas

e, ta

sks

are

crea

ted

and

the

team

pro

cess

man

ager

ens

ures

that

they

are

def

ined

and

agr

eed

to b

y th

e

team

(T

AS

K a

nd T

SP

wor

kboo

ks).

Ind

ivid

ual t

eam

mem

bers

may

sub

mit

PIP

s to

hel

p re

fine

the

proc

esse

s.

S

Scri

pts:

PIP

, PM

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

,

PIP

GP

3.2

. Col

lect

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, m

easu

res,

mea

sure

men

t res

ults

, and

impr

ovem

ent

info

rmat

ion

deri

ved

from

pla

nnin

g an

d

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

to s

uppo

rt th

e fu

ture

use

and

impr

ovem

ent o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oces

s as

sets

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

Whi

le p

roje

ct d

ata

and

arti

fact

s ar

e no

t req

uire

d to

be

plac

ed in

an

orga

niza

tion

al r

epos

itory

by

the

TSP

, the

pro

ject

doe

s co

llec

t pro

ject

pro

cess

and

prod

uct d

ata

(TA

SK

and

TSP

wor

kboo

ks),

PIP

s, a

nd p

hase

and

pro

ject

post

mor

tem

(P

M)

data

that

can

be

used

to a

ugm

ent t

he o

rgan

izat

ion’

s as

sets

.

S

158

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U2,

WE

EK

,

PM

For

ms:

TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

GP

4.1

. Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

quan

tita

tive

obje

ctiv

es f

or th

e pr

oces

s th

at a

ddre

ss

qual

ity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

bas

ed o

n

cust

omer

nee

ds a

nd b

usin

ess

obje

ctiv

es.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

Dur

ing

a T

SP

laun

ch, m

anag

emen

t and

the

team

est

abli

sh q

uant

itat

ive

obje

ctiv

es f

or s

elec

ted

proc

esse

s, a

nd w

ork

prod

ucts

are

est

abli

shed

(L

AU

1,

LA

U2)

and

then

mon

itor

ed a

s th

e pr

ojec

t pla

n is

exe

cute

d (W

EE

K, T

SP

wor

kboo

ks)

and

whe

n th

e pr

ojec

t is

com

plet

e (P

M).

Sup

plie

r m

anag

emen

t

may

be

amon

g th

ese

targ

eted

pro

cess

es.

S

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

PM

For

ms:

TS

P

wor

kboo

ks

GP

4.2

. Sta

bili

ze th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f on

e or

mor

e su

bpro

cess

es to

det

erm

ine

the

abil

ity

of th

e pr

oces

s to

ach

ieve

the

esta

blis

hed

quan

titat

ive

qual

ity

and

proc

ess-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves.

R

oles

: Tea

m

mem

bers

, rol

e

man

ager

s

TS

P te

ams

may

col

lect

dat

a (T

SP

wor

kboo

ks)

to e

nabl

e an

alys

is o

f th

eir

perf

orm

ance

of

supp

lier

man

agem

ent a

ctiv

itie

s an

d to

mee

t the

pro

ject

’s a

nd

orga

niza

tion

al g

oals

. Tea

m m

embe

rs a

nd r

ole

man

ager

s pe

rfor

m th

is

anal

ysis

and

info

rm th

e te

am o

f pr

oces

s pe

rfor

man

ce a

t wee

kly

mee

ting

s

(WE

EK

) an

d/or

a p

hase

or

proj

ect P

M.

S

Scri

pts:

PM

For

ms:

PIP

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

GP

5.1

. Ens

ure

cont

inuo

us im

prov

emen

t of

the

proc

ess

in f

ulfi

llin

g th

e re

leva

nt

busi

ness

obj

ecti

ves

of th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

Whi

le th

e T

SP

foc

uses

on

the

team

and

not

on

the

orga

niza

tion

al a

spec

t of

supp

lier

man

agem

ent,

cont

inuo

us im

prov

emen

t of

the

proj

ect’

s pr

oces

ses

and

perf

orm

ance

is p

art o

f th

e w

ay th

at T

SP

team

s fu

ncti

on. D

ata

are

gath

ered

and

ana

lyze

d; p

roce

ss im

prov

emen

t pro

posa

ls a

re d

raft

ed,

revi

ewed

, and

impl

emen

ted

as th

e te

am s

triv

es to

mee

t its

com

mit

men

ts a

nd

goal

s. T

hese

eff

orts

can

eas

ily

be r

olle

d in

to a

n or

gani

zati

onal

vie

w.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

15

9

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

TE

STD

For

ms:

PIP

,

TS

P w

orkb

ook

GP

5.2

. Ide

ntif

y an

d co

rrec

t the

roo

t cau

ses

of d

efec

ts a

nd o

ther

pro

blem

s in

the

proc

ess.

Rol

es: T

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

TS

P te

ams

coll

ect d

ata

(TS

P w

orkb

ooks

) to

sup

port

the

iden

tific

atio

n an

d

anal

ysis

of

proj

ect-

rela

ted

prob

lem

s (P

IP, T

ES

TD

) w

ith

supp

lier

inte

ract

ions

. Tea

m m

embe

rs a

nd a

ppro

pria

te r

ole

man

ager

s pe

rfor

m

anal

yses

of

thei

r ow

n an

d te

am d

ata

to id

enti

fy a

nd p

ossi

bly

find

the

root

caus

es o

f pr

oble

ms.

S

160 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 161

Appendix B: Process Management Process Areas Using TSP as the Implementation Method

One of the assumptions for the main body of these observations was that all projects in the organization are using the TSP for all phases of a “normal” development life cycle (i.e., requirements, architecture, implementation, deployment, and maintenance). Several organizations have started to use the TSP for non-targeted applications, such as planning and executing their organizational process improvement activities and their organizational training. This appendix provides observations for the Process Management PAs when TSP practices and principles are adapted to plan and execute the associated specific practices plus the generic practices across the category. The analysis does not include generic practices in the other categories, although those could easily be included in the scope of a process group’s work plans.

Figure 11 shows the percentage of process management specific practices addressed by TSP for each PA when the TSP is used to plan and execute the practices. Detailed observations of each PA follow.

Process Management Using TSP

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

OPF OPD OT OPP OID

Process Area

Perc

ent

of p

ract

ices

Unrated

Not Addressed

Partially Addressed

SupportedDirectly Addressed

Figure 11: TSP Practices Profile for Process Management PAs When TSP Is Used as the Implementation Method

162

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Org

aniz

atio

n P

roce

ss F

ocu

s (O

PF

) T

he O

rgan

izat

ion

Proc

ess

Focu

s pr

oces

s ar

ea h

elps

the

orga

niza

tion

to p

lan

and

impl

emen

t org

aniz

atio

nal p

roce

ss im

prov

emen

t bas

ed o

n an

un

ders

tand

ing

of th

e cu

rren

t str

engt

hs a

nd w

eakn

esse

s of

the

orga

niza

tion’

s pr

oces

ses

and

proc

ess

asse

ts. C

andi

date

impr

ovem

ents

to th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

pro

cess

es a

re o

btai

ned

thro

ugh

vari

ous

mea

ns. T

hese

incl

ude

proc

ess

impr

ovem

ent p

ropo

sals

, mea

sure

men

t of

the

proc

esse

s, le

sson

s le

arne

d in

impl

emen

ting

the

proc

esse

s, a

nd r

esul

ts o

f pr

oces

s ap

prai

sals

and

pro

duct

eva

luat

ion

activ

ities

.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Str

engt

hs, w

eakn

esse

s, a

nd

impr

ovem

ent

oppo

rtun

itie

s fo

r th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

sses

are

iden

tifi

ed

peri

odic

ally

and

as

need

ed.

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U3

For

ms:

IN

V

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

desc

ript

ion

of th

e pr

oces

s ne

eds

and

obje

ctiv

es f

or th

e

orga

niza

tion

.

Oth

er: T

SP

Exe

cuti

ve

Sem

inar

, TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

Org

aniz

atio

n pr

oces

s ne

eds

are

exam

ined

and

docu

men

ted

in th

e la

unch

(L

AU

3, I

NV

).

Man

agem

ent o

bjec

tive

s (L

AU

1) ty

pica

lly

defi

ne

proc

ess-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves.

Dev

elop

men

t

stra

tegy

iden

tifi

es h

ow th

e pr

oces

s ga

ps a

re to

be

addr

esse

d. T

he T

SP E

xecu

tive

Sem

inar

, whe

n

cond

ucte

d fo

r a

sing

le c

usto

mer

as

part

of

the

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n st

rate

gy, i

nclu

des

a pr

elim

inar

y

plan

ning

ses

sion

at w

hich

the

obje

ctiv

es f

or T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

are

set.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

16

3

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

For

ms:

SU

MS,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

1.2.

App

rais

e th

e pr

oces

ses

of th

e

orga

niza

tion

per

iodi

call

y an

d as

nee

ded

to

mai

ntai

n an

und

erst

andi

ng o

f th

eir

stre

ngth

s

and

wea

knes

ses.

R

oles

: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

bers

, rol

e

man

ager

s

Org

aniz

atio

nal a

ppra

isal

s ar

e pl

anne

d fo

r as

requ

ired

dur

ing

the

laun

ch (

SU

MS

, TA

SK

).

Pla

nned

and

act

ual d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

capt

ured

in th

e T

SP

wor

kboo

k (T

AS

K, S

UM

S,

LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

) by

var

ious

team

mem

bers

.

D

A ty

pica

l man

agem

ent g

oal f

or a

n

engi

neer

ing

proc

ess

grou

p (E

PG

) is

to h

ave

an o

rgan

izat

iona

l app

rais

al b

y a

give

n da

te

wit

h ce

rtai

n de

sire

d re

sult

s.

Scri

pts:

PIP

, PM

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

,

SU

MM

AR

Y

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

1.3.

Ide

ntif

y im

prov

emen

ts to

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

sses

and

pro

cess

ass

ets.

Oth

er:

EP

G

CC

B

Can

dida

te im

prov

emen

t ide

as w

ill c

ome

from

proj

ects

and

the

larg

er o

rgan

izat

ion

to th

e E

PG

in th

e fo

rm o

f P

IPs

and

from

ana

lysi

s of

orga

niza

tion

and

pro

ject

dat

a (T

AS

K, L

OG

T,

LO

GD

, SU

MM

AR

Y, a

nd P

M).

The

EP

G C

CB

revi

ews

the

impr

ovem

ent p

ropo

sals

and

iden

tifi

es li

kely

can

dida

tes

for

impl

emen

tati

on.

D

SG2.

Im

prov

emen

ts a

re p

lann

ed a

nd

impl

emen

ted,

org

aniz

atio

nal p

roce

ss

asse

ts a

re d

eplo

yed,

and

pro

cess

-rel

ated

expe

rien

ces

are

inco

rpor

ated

into

the

orga

niza

tion

al p

roce

ss a

sset

s.

164

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U

2.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

proc

ess

acti

on

plan

s to

add

ress

impr

ovem

ents

to th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

sses

and

pro

cess

ass

ets.

For

ms:

IN

V,

SU

MS

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

WE

EK

The

laun

ch o

f th

e E

PG

incl

udes

iden

tifi

cati

on o

f

proc

ess

acti

on te

ams

(PA

Ts)

to a

ddre

ss s

peci

fic

issu

es (

e.g.

, est

abli

shm

ent o

f th

e O

SSP

,

incl

udin

g ho

w p

roce

ss a

sset

s ar

e do

cum

ente

d,

stor

ed, a

cces

sed,

and

upd

ated

). S

trat

egie

s to

clos

e ga

ps a

re d

evel

oped

(L

AU

3). P

roce

sses

for

how

the

PA

Ts

func

tion

are

est

ablis

hed

(LA

U3,

INV

, TA

SK

), a

nd P

AT

task

s ar

e pl

anne

d

(SU

MS

, TA

SK

) an

d re

view

ed (

LA

U9)

. Pla

nned

and

actu

al d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

cap

ture

d in

the

TS

P w

orkb

ook

(TA

SK

, SU

MS

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

), r

evie

wed

wee

kly

(WE

EK

), a

nd u

pdat

ed

as n

eces

sary

.

D

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

SU

MS

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.2.

Im

plem

ent p

roce

ss a

ctio

n pl

ans

acro

ss

the

orga

niza

tion

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

mem

ber

All

task

s fo

r ta

rget

ed P

AT

s ar

e ex

ecut

ed a

nd

prog

ress

is r

evie

wed

wee

kly

(WE

EK

). P

rogr

ess

and

risk

s/is

sues

of

PA

Ts

are

trac

ked

in th

e T

SP

wor

kboo

k (T

AS

K, L

OG

T, L

OG

D, S

UM

S)

by

the

EP

G a

nd P

AT

mem

bers

.

D

2.3.

Dep

loy

orga

niza

tion

al p

roce

ss a

sset

s

acro

ss th

e or

gani

zati

on.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

SU

MS

, IN

V

The

pro

cedu

res

to d

evel

op a

nd d

eplo

y pr

oces

s

asse

ts a

re r

efle

cted

as

task

s in

the

TA

SK

pla

n.

Pro

cess

dat

a fo

r th

ese

task

s ar

e ca

ptur

ed in

the

TS

P w

orkb

ook

(TA

SK

, LO

GT

, LO

GD

, SU

MS)

.

Cus

tom

scr

ipts

may

be

deve

lope

d fo

r re

peat

ed

task

s.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

16

5

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.4.

Inc

orpo

rate

pro

cess

-rel

ated

wor

k

prod

ucts

, mea

sure

s, a

nd im

prov

emen

t

info

rmat

ion

deri

ved

from

pla

nnin

g an

d

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

into

the

orga

niza

tion

al p

roce

ss a

sset

s.

Oth

er:

EP

G

CC

B

Impr

ovem

ent i

deas

and

wor

k ar

tifa

cts

and

data

com

e fr

om v

ario

us s

ourc

es (

see

SP

1.3

abo

ve).

The

EP

G C

CB

rev

iew

s th

e im

prov

emen

t

prop

osal

s an

d th

e E

PG

and

PA

T m

embe

rs

deve

lop

need

ed a

sset

s an

d in

corp

orat

e ap

prov

ed

prop

osal

s as

ref

lect

ed in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K p

lans

and

the

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

.

D

The

EP

G w

ould

hav

e to

set

up

the

infr

astr

uctu

re to

per

form

thes

e ta

sks,

prob

ably

a s

et o

f ac

tivi

ties

pla

nned

and

exec

uted

dur

ing

an in

itial

dev

elop

men

t

cycl

e fo

r th

e E

PG

.

166

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Org

aniz

atio

n P

roce

ss D

efin

itio

n (

OP

D)

The

Org

aniz

atio

nal P

roce

ss D

efin

ition

pro

cess

are

a es

tabl

ishe

s an

d m

aint

ains

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

and

oth

er a

sset

s ba

sed

on

the

proc

ess

need

s an

d ob

ject

ives

of

the

orga

niza

tion.

The

se o

ther

ass

ets

incl

ude

desc

ript

ions

of

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oces

s el

emen

ts, d

escr

iptio

ns o

f lif

e-cy

cle

mod

els,

pro

cess

tail

orin

g gu

idel

ines

, pro

cess

-rel

ated

doc

umen

tatio

n, a

nd d

ata.

Pro

ject

s ta

ilor

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

to

crea

te th

eir

defi

ned

proc

esse

s. T

he o

ther

ass

ets

supp

ort t

ailo

ring

as

wel

l as

impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

defi

ned

proc

esse

s. E

xper

ienc

es a

nd w

ork

prod

ucts

fr

om p

erfo

rmin

g th

ese

defi

ned

proc

esse

s, in

clud

ing

mea

sure

men

t dat

a, p

roce

ss d

escr

iptio

ns, p

roce

ss a

rtif

acts

, and

less

ons

lear

ned,

are

inco

rpor

ated

as

app

ropr

iate

into

the

orga

niza

tion’

s se

t of

stan

dard

pro

cess

es a

nd o

ther

ass

ets.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

A s

et o

f or

gani

zati

onal

pro

cess

asse

ts is

est

ablis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

Scri

pts:

All

TS

P

scri

pts

For

ms:

All

TS

P

form

s

Rol

es: A

ll T

SP

role

s

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

.

Oth

er:

All

“oth

er”

proc

ess

asse

ts e

xcep

t

SEI-

only

item

s

The

TS

P s

ourc

e m

ater

ials

mad

e av

aila

ble

whe

n

the

TS

P is

pro

perl

y li

cens

ed a

re li

kely

to

cons

titu

te a

maj

orit

y of

the

init

ial O

SSP

. EP

G

mem

bers

dev

elop

add

itio

nal n

eces

sary

ass

ets

and

depl

oy a

ll O

SSP

pro

cess

ele

men

ts a

ccor

ding

to

plan

s m

ade

duri

ng a

laun

ch, p

ossi

bly

usin

g a

docu

men

t lik

e th

is o

ne to

gui

de th

eir

plan

s an

d

effo

rts.

D

It is

unl

ikel

y th

at T

SP

wou

ld c

over

all

proc

ess

asse

ts r

equi

red

to s

atis

fy th

e P

As

wit

hin

CM

MI.

Scri

pts:

DE

V,

MA

INT

1.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

desc

ript

ions

of

the

life

-cyc

le m

odel

s ap

prov

ed f

or u

se in

the

orga

niza

tion

.

For

ms:

ST

RA

T,

SU

MS

, TA

SK

,

TS

P s

crip

ts d

efin

e tw

o de

faul

t lif

e-cy

cle

mod

els

(DE

V, M

AIN

T).

TA

SK p

lans

wil

l ref

lect

the

wor

k of

ada

ptin

g th

ese

for

loca

l use

or

for

docu

men

ting

and

/or

adap

ting

loca

l pra

ctic

es in

to

a pr

oper

life

-cyc

le d

escr

ipti

on. T

SP w

orkb

ooks

D

Pro

ject

team

s w

ould

use

thes

e de

scri

ptio

ns

and

tailo

ring

gui

deli

nes

(fro

m O

PD

1.3

) to

sele

ct th

eir

deve

lopm

ent l

ife

cycl

es d

urin

g

init

ial p

roje

ct la

unch

es.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

16

7

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

LO

GT

, LO

GD

Rol

es:

Pro

cess

man

ager

capt

ure

the

exec

utio

n da

ta f

or th

ese

task

s

(TA

SK

, SU

MS

, LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

).

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GD

, LO

GT

,

SU

MS

Tra

inin

g: T

SP

Lau

nch

Coa

ch

Tra

inin

g

1.3.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

tail

orin

g

crit

eria

and

gui

deli

nes

for

the

orga

niza

tion

’s

set o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

.

Oth

er:

TS

P

Pla

nnin

g an

d

Qua

lity

Gui

deli

nes

Les

sons

lear

ned

from

TS

P p

ilot p

roje

cts

are

used

to d

evel

op th

e ta

ilori

ng g

uide

lines

. The

se p

lans

are

inst

anti

ated

in S

UM

S a

nd T

AS

K in

the

EP

G’s

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

. The

wor

kboo

ks c

aptu

re

the

exec

utio

n da

ta f

or th

ese

task

s (T

AS

K,

SU

MS

, LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

).

D

Muc

h of

the

tail

orin

g ex

pert

ise

lies

wit

h th

e

TS

P c

oach

es. F

orm

al c

rite

ria

and

guid

elin

es

for

tail

orin

g an

OSS

P a

re n

ot p

art o

f th

e

TS

P.

Scri

pts:

PM

,

LA

UP

M

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

SU

MM

AR

Y

1.4.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s m

easu

rem

ent r

epos

itor

y.

Rol

es: P

lann

ing,

proc

ess,

qua

lity

,

and

test

man

ager

s

The

pro

ject

NO

TE

BO

OK

, ST

AT

US

, and

SU

MM

AR

Y f

orm

s su

mm

ariz

e pr

ojec

t-le

vel

info

rmat

ion

that

is c

onso

lidat

ed a

nd u

sed

to

upda

te th

e de

faul

t pla

nnin

g an

d qu

alit

y

guid

elin

es o

n a

regu

lar

basi

s. T

he E

PG

pla

ns f

or

thes

e ta

sks

duri

ng th

eir

laun

ch. P

lann

ed a

nd

actu

al d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

cap

ture

d in

the

TS

P w

orkb

ook

(TA

SK

, SU

MS

, LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

).

D

An

init

ial E

PG

laun

ch w

ill l

ikel

y in

clud

e

task

s to

def

ine

and

impl

emen

t the

orga

niza

tion

’s in

form

atio

n re

posi

tory

.

The

re is

als

o li

kely

to b

e a

need

to d

efin

e

othe

r m

easu

res

not s

peci

fica

lly

addr

esse

d

by th

e P

SP/T

SP, s

uch

as f

or C

M o

r O

PF

acti

viti

es.

168

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

All

TS

P

scri

pts

For

ms:

All

TS

P

form

s

Rol

es: A

ll T

SP

role

s

Oth

er:

All

“oth

er”

proc

ess

asse

ts

1.5.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

ss a

sset

libr

ary.

Tra

inin

g:

Intr

oduc

tion

to

Per

sona

l

Pro

cess

, PSP

for

Eng

inee

rs,

TSP

Exe

cuti

ve

Sem

inar

,

Man

agin

g TS

P

Tea

ms

The

EP

G u

ses

the

TSP

ass

ets

as th

e fo

unda

tion

of th

e pr

oces

s as

set l

ibra

ry (

PA

L)

are

incl

uded

in

the

SE

PG

wor

kboo

k. P

erio

dic

laun

ches

typi

call

y

deve

lop

a st

rate

gy a

nd n

eede

d pr

oces

ses

to p

lan

the

wor

k of

cre

atin

g an

d m

aint

aini

ng th

e P

AL

.

Pla

nned

and

act

ual d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

capt

ured

in th

e T

SP

wor

kboo

k (T

AS

K, S

UM

S,

LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

).

D

See

Not

es o

n SP

1.4

abo

ve.

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

16

9

Org

aniz

atio

nal

Tra

inin

g (

OT

) T

he O

rgan

izat

iona

l Tra

inin

g pr

oces

s ar

ea id

entif

ies

the

stra

tegi

c tr

aini

ng n

eeds

of

the

orga

niza

tion,

as

wel

l as

the

tact

ical

trai

ning

nee

ds th

at a

re

com

mon

acr

oss

proj

ects

and

sup

port

gro

ups.

In

part

icul

ar, t

rain

ing

is d

evel

oped

or

obta

ined

to d

evel

op th

e sk

ills

req

uire

d to

per

form

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

. The

mai

n co

mpo

nent

s of

trai

ning

incl

ude

a m

anag

ed tr

aini

ng-d

evel

opm

ent p

rogr

am, d

ocum

ente

d pl

ans,

pe

rson

nel w

ith a

ppro

pria

te k

now

ledg

e, a

nd m

echa

nism

s fo

r m

easu

ring

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

trai

ning

pro

gram

. The

obs

erva

tion

s in

this

sec

tion

assu

me

the

form

atio

n of

a p

roce

ss a

ctio

n te

am (

PAT

) un

der

the

dire

ctio

n of

the

EPG

cha

rged

with

est

ablis

hing

and

mai

ntai

ning

bot

h th

e tr

aini

ng

need

s of

the

orga

niza

tion

and

the

capa

bilit

ies

to f

ulfi

ll th

ose

need

s.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

A t

rain

ing

capa

bilit

y th

at s

uppo

rts

the

orga

niza

tion

’s m

anag

emen

t an

d

tech

nica

l rol

es is

est

ablis

hed

and

mai

ntai

ned.

Scri

pts/

For

ms:

OT

team

laun

ch

arti

fact

s, P

M

arti

fact

s, P

IPs

1.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

stra

tegi

c

trai

ning

nee

ds o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

sequ

ence

A P

AT

ded

icat

ed to

Org

aniz

atio

nal T

rain

ing

(OT

) m

atte

rs is

a li

kely

to b

e fo

rmed

by

the

EP

G.

The

OT

team

laun

ches

sep

arat

ely

or

poss

ibly

in c

onju

ncti

on w

ith

an E

PG

laun

ch/r

elau

nch.

Pla

ns a

nd ta

sks

to d

isco

ver,

deve

lop,

and

mai

ntai

n th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

trai

ning

need

s ar

e in

clud

ed in

the

OT

PA

T w

orkb

ooks

.

Pla

nned

and

act

ual d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

capt

ured

in th

e T

SP

wor

kboo

k (T

AS

K, S

UM

S,

LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

).

D

Pos

tmor

tem

s fr

om o

ther

pro

ject

s an

d P

IPs

from

acr

oss

the

orga

niza

tion

may

poi

nt in

the

dire

ctio

n of

som

e st

rate

gic

trai

ning

need

s fo

r an

org

aniz

atio

n. L

AU

1 of

the

OT

PA

T la

unch

may

als

o pr

ovid

e in

form

atio

n

from

sen

ior

man

agem

ent o

n st

rate

gic

trai

ning

nee

ds.

The

TS

P in

trod

ucti

on

sequ

ence

ver

y of

ten

iden

tifi

es P

SP, T

SP,

and

CM

MI

amon

g th

e st

rate

gic

trai

ning

need

s of

the

orga

niza

tion

.

170

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, W

EE

K,

PM

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

TA

SK

1.2.

Det

erm

ine

whi

ch tr

aini

ng n

eeds

are

the

resp

onsi

bili

ty o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on a

nd w

hich

wil

l be

left

to th

e in

divi

dual

pro

ject

or

supp

ort g

roup

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Pro

ject

team

s, in

clud

ing

the

team

lead

er a

nd

indi

vidu

al te

am m

embe

rs, a

re r

espo

nsib

le f

or

dete

rmin

ing

the

trai

ning

nee

ds o

f th

eir

team

mem

bers

. T

his

can

occu

r du

ring

laun

ch

prep

arat

ion

(PR

EP

L, P

RE

PR

), d

urin

g th

e la

unch

(esp

ecia

lly

LA

U3)

, or

duri

ng th

e pr

ojec

t and

docu

men

ted

in th

e w

eekl

y m

eeti

ng (

WE

EK

) or

in a

pos

tmor

tem

(P

M).

The

OT

team

rev

iew

s

thes

e an

d or

gani

zati

onal

nee

ds.

Any

req

uire

d

task

s ar

e ad

ded

to th

e O

T te

am w

orkb

ook.

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

RE

L, W

EE

K

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

SU

MS

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.3.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

an

orga

niza

tion

al tr

aini

ng ta

ctic

al p

lan.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

Pla

ns a

nd ta

sks

to d

evel

op a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s ta

ctic

al tr

aini

ng p

lan

are

deve

lope

d in

the

OT

PA

T la

unch

(L

AU

) an

d

upda

ted

base

d on

res

ults

rep

orte

d in

wee

kly

mee

ting

s (W

EE

K)

and

rela

unch

es (

RE

L)

and

in

resp

onse

to r

eque

sts

from

TS

P p

roje

cts

(see

OT

SP 1

.1 n

otes

abo

ve).

Pla

nned

and

act

ual d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

cap

ture

d in

the

TS

P

wor

kboo

k (T

AS

K, S

UM

S, L

OG

T, a

nd L

OG

D).

An

earl

y ve

rsio

n of

suc

h a

tact

ical

pla

n is

incl

uded

in th

e pl

an f

or T

SP

intr

oduc

tion.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

17

1

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

For

ms:

OT

PA

T

laun

ch a

rtif

acts

,

SU

MS

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.4.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

a tr

aini

ng

capa

bili

ty to

add

ress

org

aniz

atio

nal t

rain

ing

need

s.

Oth

er: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

Pla

ns a

nd ta

sks

to d

evel

op a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s tr

aini

ng c

apab

ility

, whe

ther

inte

rnal

, ext

erna

l, or

a c

ombi

natio

n of

thes

e, a

re

crea

ted

duri

ng th

e O

T P

AT

laun

ch.

Pla

nned

and

actu

al d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

cap

ture

d in

the

TS

P w

orkb

ook

(TA

SK

, SU

MS

, LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

). T

he T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

sequ

ence

stro

ngly

enc

oura

ges

the

impl

emen

ting

orga

niza

tion

to d

evel

op a

nd m

aint

ain

inte

rnal

PSP

trai

ning

and

TSP

coa

chin

g ca

pabi

liti

es, a

nd

spec

ifie

s th

e co

urse

and

aut

hori

zati

on s

eque

nce

for

thes

e ca

pabi

liti

es.

D

Obv

ious

ly th

e tr

aini

ng n

eeds

of

the

orga

niza

tion

wil

l cha

nge

over

tim

e as

TS

P

is f

irst

intr

oduc

ed a

nd th

en b

ecom

es

wid

espr

ead

in th

e or

gani

zati

on.

The

EP

G

or O

T P

AT

mus

t ada

pt to

thes

e ch

angi

ng

need

s, w

hich

sho

uld

be r

efle

cted

in th

e

acti

viti

es c

aptu

red

in th

eir

TSP

wor

kboo

ks

and

rela

ted

arti

fact

s.

SG2.

Tra

inin

g ne

cess

ary

for

indi

vidu

als

to p

erfo

rm t

heir

rol

es e

ffec

tive

ly is

prov

ided

.

2.1.

Del

iver

the

trai

ning

fol

low

ing

the

orga

niza

tion

al ta

ctic

al p

lan.

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

Act

ual d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

cap

ture

d in

the

TS

P w

orkb

ook

(TA

SK

, SU

MS

, LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

).

D

172

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

WE

EK

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

SU

MS

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

2.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

reco

rds

of

orga

niza

tion

al tr

aini

ng.

The

OT

PA

T p

lans

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

dur

ing

its

laun

ch a

nd tr

acks

them

in th

e O

T w

orkb

ooks

.

Use

of

copy

righ

ted

PSP

and

TSP

trai

ning

mat

eria

ls r

equi

res

repo

rtin

g tr

aini

ng d

ata

to th

e

SE

I, w

hich

mai

ntai

ns r

ecor

ds o

f th

is tr

aini

ng.

Pla

nned

and

act

ual d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

capt

ured

in th

e T

SP

wor

kboo

k (T

AS

K, S

UM

S,

LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

). O

T P

AT

task

s us

uall

y

incl

ude

crea

tion

, col

lect

ion,

and

mai

nten

ance

of

such

trai

ning

dat

a fo

r al

l org

aniz

atio

nal t

rain

ing.

The

OT

PA

T o

r E

PG

wee

kly

mee

ting

typi

call

y

repo

rts

sum

mar

y tr

aini

ng d

ata.

D

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

2.3.

Ass

ess

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

orga

niza

tion

’s tr

aini

ng p

rogr

am.

Rol

es: P

SP

inst

ruct

or, T

SP

coac

h, te

am

lead

er

Pla

ns/ta

sks

to a

sses

s th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

trai

ning

capa

bili

ty a

re in

clud

ed in

the

OT

PA

T

wor

kboo

k, a

nd s

tatu

s is

rev

iew

ed a

t wee

kly

mee

tings

(W

EE

K).

In

addi

tion,

PSP

inst

ruct

ors

regu

larl

y as

sess

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

trai

ning

whe

n gr

adin

g P

SP a

ssig

nmen

ts a

nd w

hen

sum

mar

izin

g cl

ass

resu

lts to

the

clas

s, to

the

spon

sori

ng m

anag

er, a

nd to

the

OT

PA

T.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

17

3

Org

aniz

atio

nal

Pro

cess

Per

form

ance

(O

PP

) T

he O

rgan

izat

iona

l Pro

cess

Per

form

ance

pro

cess

are

a de

rive

s qu

antit

ativ

e ob

ject

ives

for

qua

lity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

fro

m th

e or

gani

zatio

n’s

busi

ness

obj

ectiv

es. T

he o

rgan

izat

ion

prov

ides

pro

ject

s an

d su

ppor

t gro

ups

with

com

mon

mea

sure

s, p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce b

asel

ines

, and

pro

cess

pe

rfor

man

ce m

odel

s. T

hese

add

ition

al o

rgan

izat

iona

l sup

port

ass

ets

supp

ort q

uant

itat

ive

proj

ect m

anag

emen

t and

sta

tistic

al m

anag

emen

t of

criti

cal

subp

roce

sses

for

bot

h pr

ojec

ts a

nd s

uppo

rt g

roup

s. T

he o

rgan

izat

ion

anal

yzes

the

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

dat

a co

llec

ted

from

thes

e de

fine

d pr

oces

ses

to

deve

lop

a qu

antit

ativ

e un

ders

tand

ing

of p

rodu

ct q

ualit

y, s

ervi

ce q

ualit

y, a

nd p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

set

of

stan

dard

pro

cess

es.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Bas

elin

es a

nd m

odel

s th

at

char

acte

rize

the

exp

ecte

d pr

oces

s

perf

orm

ance

of

the

orga

niza

tion

’s s

et o

f

stan

dard

pro

cess

es a

re e

stab

lishe

d an

d

mai

ntai

ned.

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

1.1.

Sel

ect t

he p

roce

sses

or

proc

ess

elem

ents

in th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

set

of

stan

dard

pro

cess

es th

at a

re to

be

incl

uded

in

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce

anal

ysis

.

Oth

er:

Pla

nnin

g

and

qual

ity

guid

elin

es

The

EP

G ty

pica

lly

sele

cts

a m

ixtu

re o

f th

e T

SP

proc

ess

asse

ts a

nd e

xist

ing

orga

niza

tion

al a

sset

s,

base

d on

less

ons

lear

ned

duri

ng T

SP p

ilot

proj

ects

. P

lans

and

task

s to

per

form

this

eval

uati

on a

nd s

elec

tion

pro

cess

are

incl

uded

in

the

team

wor

kboo

k, a

nd p

lann

ed a

nd a

ctua

l dat

a

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

cap

ture

d in

the

indi

vidu

al

TS

P w

orkb

ook

(TA

SK

, SU

MS

, LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

).

D

The

team

may

be

dire

cted

to c

erta

in

proc

esse

s or

pro

cess

ele

men

ts b

y

man

agem

ent i

n L

AU

1. T

ypic

ally

thes

e ar

e

“kno

wn

good

” el

emen

ts o

f ex

isti

ng

orga

niza

tion

al p

roce

sses

that

hav

e a

prov

en

trac

k re

cord

fro

m p

revi

ous

proj

ects

.

174

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6,

PM

For

ms:

SU

MS

, SU

MP

,

SU

MQ

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.2.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

defi

niti

ons

of

the

mea

sure

s th

at a

re to

be

incl

uded

in th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce

anal

yses

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Bas

ic P

SP/T

SP

def

ines

a s

tand

ard

set o

f ba

se

mea

sure

s to

be

capt

ured

: pro

duct

siz

e, ti

me

spen

t

by p

roce

ss p

hase

, def

ects

inje

cted

and

rem

oved

by p

roce

ss p

hase

, and

task

com

plet

ion

date

.

Doz

ens

of d

eriv

ed m

easu

res

are

read

ily

avai

labl

e

depe

ndin

g on

the

orga

niza

tion

’s b

usin

ess

obje

ctiv

es a

nd h

ow th

ose

obje

ctiv

es m

ight

tran

slat

e to

the

mea

sure

s av

aila

ble.

D

For

exa

mpl

e, e

arne

d va

lue,

task

hou

rs p

er

wee

k, te

st d

efec

ts p

er K

LO

C, r

evie

w r

ates

,

yiel

d, a

nd q

ualit

y pr

ofil

e in

dex

(QP

I)

com

pone

nts

are

all c

andi

date

met

rics

for

anal

yzin

g or

gani

zati

onal

pro

cess

perf

orm

ance

. T

here

are

lite

rall

y do

zens

of

cand

idat

e de

rive

d m

easu

res

from

PSP

trai

ning

and

the

vari

ous

TSP

ass

ets

that

mig

ht b

e us

ed b

y th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U2

1.3.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

quan

titat

ive

obje

ctiv

es f

or q

uali

ty a

nd p

roce

ss

perf

orm

ance

for

the

orga

niza

tion

. O

ther

: T

SP

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

Typ

ical

ly m

anag

emen

t pre

sent

s qu

anti

tati

ve

busi

ness

obj

ecti

ves

to th

e E

PG

in L

AU

1 of

the

EP

G la

unch

. T

hese

obj

ecti

ves

are

inte

rpre

ted

firs

t dur

ing

LA

U2

whe

n th

e E

PG

dev

elop

s th

eir

team

’s g

oals

, and

then

on

an o

ngoi

ng b

asis

as

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n pr

ocee

ds a

nd a

s th

e

rela

tion

ship

bet

wee

n bu

sine

ss o

bjec

tive

s an

d th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s q

uali

ty a

nd p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce

evol

ves.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

17

5

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U

For

ms:

SU

MS

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

1.4.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce

base

line

s.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

Org

aniz

atio

nal b

asel

ines

, if

they

do

not a

lrea

dy

exis

t, ar

e es

tabl

ishe

d by

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n (i

.e.

pilo

t pro

ject

res

ults

). A

s th

e E

PG

acc

umul

ates

a

reco

rd o

f or

gani

zati

onal

per

form

ance

usi

ng th

e

TS

P, p

roce

ss b

asel

ines

are

adj

uste

d to

ref

lect

curr

ent r

eali

ties

. Pl

ans

and

task

s fo

r th

ese

acti

viti

es a

re in

clud

ed in

the

team

wor

kboo

k

duri

ng th

e E

PG

laun

ch (

LA

U),

and

pla

nned

and

actu

al d

ata

are

capt

ured

in th

e in

divi

dual

TSP

wor

kboo

k (T

AS

K, S

UM

S, L

OG

T, a

nd L

OG

D).

D

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U3,

LA

U4,

LA

U5,

LA

U6,

PM

For

ms:

SU

MS,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

1.5.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

mod

els

for

the

orga

niza

tion

’s

set o

f st

anda

rd p

roce

sses

.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

The

pro

cess

per

form

ance

mod

el u

nder

lyin

g th

e

TS

P is

cal

ibra

ted

to th

e or

gani

zati

on d

urin

g T

SP

intr

oduc

tion.

As

the

EP

G a

ids

adap

tati

on,

roll

out,

and

inst

itutio

nali

zati

on o

f T

SP

acr

oss

the

orga

niza

tion

, the

mod

el is

adj

uste

d to

ref

lect

how

TS

P, a

s im

plem

ente

d, p

erfo

rms.

Pla

ns a

nd ta

sks

to e

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n th

e pr

oces

s

perf

orm

ance

mod

els

are

dete

rmin

ed f

irst

dur

ing

the

EP

G la

unch

(L

AU

) an

d th

en d

urin

g

post

mor

tem

s, r

elau

nche

s, a

nd o

ngoi

ng a

naly

sis

of p

roje

ct r

esul

ts.

Pla

nned

and

act

ual d

ata

for

thes

e ac

tivi

ties

are

cap

ture

d in

the

TS

P

wor

kboo

k (T

AS

K, S

UM

S, L

OG

T, a

nd L

OG

D).

D

Mos

t org

aniz

atio

ns c

usto

miz

e th

e de

faul

t

TS

P p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce m

odel

bas

ed o

n

thei

r ow

n ne

eds

and

situ

atio

n. E

xper

ienc

e

to d

ate

indi

cate

s th

at th

e de

faul

t TSP

mod

el

refl

ects

the

gene

ral t

ruth

that

pro

duct

siz

e

and

qual

ity

(mea

sure

d as

def

ect d

ensi

ty

duri

ng la

te te

st p

hase

s) a

re th

e m

ajor

dri

vers

of p

roce

ss p

erfo

rman

ce.

176

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Org

aniz

atio

nal

Inn

ova

tio

n a

nd

Dep

loym

ent

(OID

) T

he O

rgan

izat

iona

l Inn

ovat

ion

and

Dep

loym

ent p

roce

ss a

rea

sele

cts

and

depl

oys

prop

osed

incr

emen

tal a

nd in

nova

tive

impr

ovem

ents

that

add

ress

th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

abi

lity

to m

eet i

ts q

ualit

y an

d pr

oces

s-pe

rfor

man

ce o

bjec

tive

s. T

he id

entif

icat

ion

of p

rom

isin

g in

crem

enta

l and

inno

vati

ve

impr

ovem

ents

sho

uld

invo

lve

the

part

icip

atio

n of

an

empo

wer

ed w

orkf

orce

alig

ned

with

the

busi

ness

val

ues

and

obje

ctiv

es o

f th

e or

gani

zatio

n. T

he

sele

ctio

n of

impr

ovem

ents

to d

eplo

y is

bas

ed o

n a

quan

titat

ive

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

pote

ntia

l ben

efits

and

cos

ts f

rom

dep

loyi

ng c

andi

date

im

prov

emen

ts a

nd th

e av

aila

ble

fund

ing

for

such

dep

loym

ent.

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

SG1.

Pro

cess

and

tec

hnol

ogy

impr

ovem

ents

tha

t co

ntri

bute

to

mee

ting

qual

ity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

obje

ctiv

es a

re s

elec

ted.

Scri

pts:

PIP

,

PM

, LA

UP

M,

TE

ST

D

For

ms:

EP

G

indi

vidu

al a

nd

team

wor

kboo

ks

1.1.

Col

lect

and

ana

lyze

pro

cess

- an

d

tech

nolo

gy-i

mpr

ovem

ent p

ropo

sals

.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s (e

sp.

proc

ess

man

ager

)

PIP

s re

cord

bot

h pr

oces

s an

d te

chno

logy

impr

ovem

ent s

ugge

stio

ns.

The

pro

cess

man

ager

man

ages

the

elic

itat

ion,

gat

heri

ng, r

ecor

ding

,

trac

king

, and

han

dlin

g of

the

team

’s P

IPs

thro

ugho

ut th

e de

velo

pmen

t cyc

le a

nd e

spec

iall

y

at f

orm

al e

valu

atio

n ac

tivi

ties

(L

AU

PM

, PM

).

PIP

s ar

e al

so o

ften

gen

erat

ed in

the

cont

ext o

f a

TE

ST

D a

ctiv

ity.

The

EP

G p

lans

and

trac

ks

acti

viti

es to

eva

luat

e th

ese

PIP

s (T

AS

K, L

OG

T,

LO

GD

, and

SU

MS

).

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

17

7

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

TA

SK, L

OG

T

1.2.

Ide

ntif

y an

d an

alyz

e in

nova

tive

impr

ovem

ents

that

cou

ld in

crea

se th

e

orga

niza

tion

’s q

uali

ty a

nd p

roce

ss

perf

orm

ance

.

Rol

es: E

PG

CC

B (

typi

call

y

team

lead

er a

nd

desi

gn,

impl

emen

tati

on,

and

supp

ort

man

ager

s)

As

part

of

PIP

eva

luat

ion,

the

EP

G e

xam

ines

PIP

s an

d ot

her

impr

ovem

ent a

rtif

acts

and

dat

a

from

indi

vidu

al p

roje

cts.

The

EP

G C

CB

rev

iew

s

and

appr

oves

impr

ovem

ent p

ropo

sals

wit

h

man

agem

ent o

vers

ight

. T

hese

act

ivit

ies

are

docu

men

ted

in th

e E

PG

pro

ject

SU

MS

and

indi

vidu

al ta

sks

refl

ecte

d in

indi

vidu

al T

AS

K

plan

s an

d ti

me

logs

(L

OG

T).

D

Scri

pts:

PM

1.

3. P

ilot p

roce

ss a

nd te

chno

logy

impr

ovem

ents

to s

elec

t whi

ch o

nes

to

impl

emen

t.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, p

roce

ss

man

ager

, oth

er

role

man

ager

s

Wor

king

wit

h th

e pr

ojec

ts, t

ypic

ally

thro

ugh

the

team

lead

er, p

roce

ss m

anag

er, a

nd o

ther

rol

e

man

ager

s as

app

ropr

iate

, the

EP

G m

onit

ors,

guid

es, a

nd e

valu

ates

pro

cess

and

tech

nolo

gy

impr

ovem

ents

. R

esul

ts o

f th

e pi

lot a

ctiv

itie

s ar

e

revi

ewed

as

they

pro

ceed

and

in p

roje

ct

post

mor

tem

s (P

M)

wit

h th

e te

am.

D

A p

ilot

ing

stra

tegy

is f

unda

men

tal t

o th

e

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n se

quen

ce.

1.4.

Sel

ect p

roce

ss-

and

tech

nolo

gy-

impr

ovem

ent p

ropo

sals

for

dep

loym

ent

acro

ss th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Rol

es:

EP

G

CC

B (

sam

e as

OID

SP

1.2

abov

e)

Res

ults

of

pilo

ted

proc

ess

and

tech

nolo

gy

impr

ovem

ents

are

eva

luat

ed b

y th

e E

PG

CC

B

and

reco

mm

ende

d fo

r ap

prov

al b

y m

anag

emen

t.

D

The

pro

cess

per

form

ance

mod

el in

OP

P

prov

ides

cri

tica

l eva

luat

ion

crit

eria

. D

AR

and

CA

R p

ract

ices

are

com

mon

ly u

sed.

SG2.

Mea

sura

ble

impr

ovem

ents

to

the

orga

niza

tion

’s p

roce

sses

and

tec

hnol

ogie

s

are

cont

inua

lly a

nd s

yste

mat

ical

ly

depl

oyed

.

178

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

RE

L

For

ms:

All

laun

ch a

sset

s

(esp

. ind

ivid

ual

and

cons

olid

ated

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

)

2.1.

Est

abli

sh a

nd m

aint

ain

the

plan

s fo

r

depl

oyin

g th

e se

lect

ed p

roce

ss a

nd

tech

nolo

gy im

prov

emen

ts.

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er, t

eam

mem

bers

, rol

e

man

ager

s

Pla

nnin

g fo

r th

e de

ploy

men

t of

inno

vati

ons

is

the

mai

n pu

rpos

e of

EP

G la

unch

es a

nd

rela

unch

es.

Man

ager

s of

or

seni

or te

chni

cal

lead

ers

from

the

deve

lopm

ent s

taff

may

fun

ctio

n

as m

arke

ting

rep

rese

ntat

ives

. P

lans

are

cap

ture

d

in th

e in

divi

dual

and

con

soli

date

d T

SP

wor

kboo

ks.

D

Ada

ptin

g an

d im

plem

enti

ng th

e fe

atur

es o

f

the

“sta

ndar

d” T

SP p

roce

ss a

sset

s fo

r us

e

by th

e E

PG

is a

val

uabl

e op

port

unit

y fo

r th

e

EP

G to

mod

el d

esir

ed b

ehav

iors

for

deve

lope

rs a

nd f

or th

e or

gani

zatio

n as

a

who

le.

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

SU

MM

AR

Y,

TS

P w

orkb

ooks

Rol

es: T

eam

lead

er

2.2.

Man

age

the

depl

oym

ent o

f th

e se

lect

ed

proc

esse

s an

d te

chno

logy

impr

ovem

ents

.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

EP

G m

embe

rs e

xecu

te a

gain

st th

e ta

sks

in th

eir

indi

vidu

al T

SP w

orkb

ooks

and

rep

ort s

tatu

s to

the

team

at t

he w

eekl

y m

eeti

ng (

WE

EK

). T

he

team

lead

er m

akes

ST

AT

US

rep

orts

to

man

agem

ent w

eekl

y or

on

som

e ot

her

regu

lar

basi

s as

req

uire

d. R

esul

ts a

re d

escr

ibed

in

SU

MM

AR

Y r

epor

ts.

The

team

lead

er o

f th

e

EP

G p

arti

cipa

tes

in q

uart

erly

rev

iew

s ju

st li

ke

any

othe

r pr

ojec

t tea

m le

ader

.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

17

9

Spec

ific

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Not

es

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

PM

For

ms:

TS

P

cons

olid

ated

wor

kboo

ks

2.3.

Mea

sure

the

effe

cts

of th

e de

ploy

ed

proc

ess

and

tech

nolo

gy im

prov

emen

ts.

Rol

es: R

ole

man

ager

s (e

sp.

proc

ess

man

ager

)

The

EP

G r

evie

ws

cons

olid

ated

TSP

wor

kboo

ks

from

pro

ject

team

s ac

ross

the

orga

niza

tion

,

usua

lly

wit

h sp

ecia

l att

entio

n to

dat

a fr

om te

ams

usin

g re

cent

ly d

eplo

yed

impr

ovem

ents

. S

peci

fic

eval

uati

ons

depe

nd o

n th

e im

prov

emen

ts, b

ut th

e

EP

G p

roce

ss m

anag

er is

typi

call

y in

volv

ed w

ith

the

proc

ess

man

ager

s an

d ot

her

affe

cted

rol

e

man

ager

s fr

om th

e im

plem

enti

ng d

evel

opm

ent

team

s to

eva

luat

e an

d tu

ne th

e im

prov

emen

ts.

D

180

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

TS

P a

nd

Pro

cess

Man

agem

ent

Usi

ng

TS

P G

ener

ic P

ract

ices

T

he g

ener

ic p

ract

ices

bec

ome

an in

tere

stin

g an

d po

tent

iall

y va

luab

le s

ourc

e of

info

rmat

ion

and

insp

irat

ion

to th

e E

PG th

at c

hoos

es to

use

TSP

to

impl

emen

t CM

MI

best

pra

ctic

es.

For

exam

ple,

whi

le T

SP n

orm

ally

avo

ids

deal

ing

wit

h po

licy

issu

es, o

ne c

entr

al ta

sk f

acin

g an

EPG

is w

hat

polic

ies

to r

ecom

men

d, p

ossi

bly

in d

raft

for

m, f

or a

man

agem

ent s

teer

ing

grou

p or

equ

ival

ent e

ntit

y. S

uch

polic

y st

atem

ents

wil

l typ

ical

ly r

ange

be

yond

pro

cess

man

agem

ent a

nd in

to th

e ot

her

proc

ess

cate

gori

es.

The

sam

e m

ay b

e sa

id f

or m

ost G

Ps in

the

othe

r pr

oces

s ar

eas

whe

re T

SP

typi

call

y pr

ovid

es o

nly

supp

ortin

g pr

actic

es.

It th

en f

alls

to th

e E

PG o

r a

desi

gnat

ed P

AT

to d

evis

e st

anda

rd o

rgan

izat

iona

l pra

ctic

e.

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

GP

2.1

. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n an

orga

niza

tion

al p

olic

y fo

r pl

anni

ng a

nd

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

A

ll:

Whi

le p

olic

ies

are

out o

f th

e sc

ope

of T

SP

und

er n

orm

al c

ircu

mst

ance

s,

it o

ften

bec

omes

the

wor

k of

the

EP

G, i

n th

e ci

rcum

stan

ces

desc

ribe

d in

this

appe

ndix

, to

draf

t pol

icy

stat

emen

ts f

or m

anag

emen

t dis

cuss

ion

and

appr

oval

.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

RE

L

GP

2.2

. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n th

e pl

an f

or

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess.

For

ms:

TSP

wor

kboo

ks (

esp.

SU

MS

, SU

MQ

,

TA

SK

, SC

HE

D)

All

: T

he E

PG

, OT

PA

T, a

nd a

ny o

ther

pro

cess

act

ion

team

s de

sign

ated

by

man

agem

ent o

r th

e E

PG

fol

low

the

stan

dard

laun

ch a

nd r

elau

nch

scri

pts,

resu

ltin

g in

an

over

all p

lan

or c

olle

ctio

n of

pla

ns to

add

ress

org

aniz

atio

nal

proc

ess

issu

es.

The

se p

lans

wil

l be

refl

ecte

d in

the

TSP

con

solid

ated

and

indi

vidu

al w

orkb

ooks

cre

ated

dur

ing

the

laun

ch, s

peci

fica

lly

in S

UM

S,

SU

MQ

, TA

SK

, and

SC

HE

D.

D

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

18

1

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, L

AU

6

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

TA

SK

GP

2.3

. P

rovi

de r

esou

rces

for

per

form

ing

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts,

and

prov

idin

g th

e se

rvic

es o

f th

e pr

oces

s.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

All

: E

PG

and

PA

T m

embe

rs a

re in

itia

lly

assi

gned

dur

ing

laun

ch/r

elau

nch

prep

arat

ions

(P

RE

PL

, PR

EP

R).

Tea

m m

embe

rs a

re a

ssig

ned

to s

peci

fic

proj

ect t

asks

(S

UM

S, T

AS

K)

duri

ng L

AU

6. A

ny d

iscr

epan

cies

bet

wee

n

need

ed a

nd a

ctua

l sta

ff a

re n

egot

iate

d be

twee

n th

e af

fect

ed te

am a

nd

man

agem

ent,

begi

nnin

g fo

rmal

ly in

LA

U9

and

poss

ibly

info

rmal

ly m

uch

earl

ier

in th

e la

unch

. T

he te

am le

ader

and

rol

e m

anag

ers

help

to e

nsur

e th

at

the

task

s ar

e pr

oper

ly s

taff

ed, f

irst

dur

ing

the

laun

ch, a

nd th

en d

urin

g pr

ojec

t

exec

utio

n.

D

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L, L

AU

6

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

SU

MS

GP

2.4

. A

ssig

n re

spon

sibi

lity

and

aut

hori

ty

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess,

dev

elop

ing

the

wor

k pr

oduc

ts, a

nd p

rovi

ding

the

serv

ices

of th

e pr

oces

s.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

s

The

EP

G te

am le

ader

and

lead

ers

of th

e va

riou

s P

AT

s ar

e id

enti

fied

dur

ing

prep

arat

ions

for

the

vari

ous

laun

ches

(P

RE

PL

) an

d re

laun

ches

(P

RE

PR

).

Indi

vidu

al r

ole

man

ager

s ar

e as

sign

ed d

urin

g L

AU

2 of

the

laun

ches

. (N

ote:

Bec

ause

this

is n

ot a

targ

eted

app

licat

ion

of T

SP

, ada

ptat

ion

and

cust

omiz

atio

n of

the

role

s is

to b

e ex

pect

ed to

an

exte

nt n

ot ty

pica

lly

seen

in

the

“nor

mal

” T

SP

team

.) T

he te

am le

ader

(s)

and

role

man

ager

s ar

e

resp

onsi

ble

to e

nsur

e th

at th

e ta

sks

are

prop

erly

sta

ffed

. D

urin

g th

e

(re)

laun

ch p

roce

ss, t

eam

mem

bers

par

tici

pate

in d

efin

ing,

und

erst

andi

ng,

and

acce

ptin

g th

eir

indi

vidu

al r

espo

nsib

iliti

es.

D

182

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

PM

,

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, W

EE

K

GP

2.5

. T

rain

the

peop

le p

erfo

rmin

g or

supp

ortin

g th

e pr

oces

s as

nee

ded.

Oth

er:

TS

P

intr

oduc

tion

stra

tegy

,

Man

agin

g TS

P

Tea

ms,

Intr

oduc

tion

to

Per

sona

l

Pro

cess

, spe

cifi

c

TS

P p

roce

ss a

nd

tool

trai

ning

EP

G a

nd P

AT

mem

bers

typi

call

y re

ceiv

e In

trod

ucti

on to

Per

sona

l Pro

cess

and

Man

agin

g TS

P T

eam

s tr

aini

ng a

s a

min

imum

, and

a f

ew ta

ke th

e fu

ll

rang

e of

PSP

and

TS

P tr

aini

ng s

peci

fied

by

the

TS

P in

trod

uctio

n st

rate

gy.

Add

itio

nal t

rain

ing

iden

tifie

d du

ring

laun

ch/r

elau

nch

prep

arat

ions

(P

RE

PL

,

PR

EP

R)

or d

urin

g an

d af

ter

the

proj

ect (

WE

EK

, PM

) is

bui

lt in

to p

roje

ct

plan

s ei

ther

dir

ectl

y by

acc

ount

ing

for

trai

ning

in in

divi

dual

TSP

wor

kboo

ks

duri

ng la

unch

es/r

elau

nche

s or

indi

rect

ly b

y re

duci

ng a

vail

able

hou

rs a

t

spec

ific

cal

enda

r ti

mes

.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

WE

EK

For

ms:

TSP

wor

kboo

ks,

WE

EK

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, s

uppo

rt

man

ager

GP

2.6

. P

lace

des

igna

ted

wor

k pr

oduc

ts o

f

the

proc

ess

unde

r ap

prop

riat

e le

vels

of

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t.

Oth

er:

NO

TE

BO

OK

Tea

m p

lans

and

wee

kly

stat

us (

WE

EK

) ar

e ca

ptur

ed o

n th

e T

SP w

orkb

ooks

and

othe

r la

unch

art

ifac

ts a

nd s

tore

d in

the

vari

ous

proj

ect N

OT

EB

OO

Ks

for

the

EP

G a

nd e

ach

PA

T.

LA

U3

for

each

laun

ch a

ctiv

ity

iden

tifi

es w

hat w

ork

prod

ucts

sho

uld

be p

lace

d un

der

conf

igur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t and

whe

n th

is

happ

ens

duri

ng d

evel

opm

ent.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

18

3

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

PR

EP

L,

PR

EP

R, L

AU

1,

LA

U9,

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

GP

2.7

. Id

enti

fy a

nd in

volv

e th

e re

leva

nt

stak

ehol

ders

as

plan

ned.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

Dur

ing

the

prep

arat

ion

for

a (r

e)la

unch

, rel

evan

t sta

keho

lder

s ar

e id

enti

fied

duri

ng la

unch

/rel

aunc

h pr

epar

atio

ns a

nd u

sual

ly p

arti

cipa

te in

mee

ting

s 1

and

9 (L

AU

1, L

AU

9) a

t a m

inim

um.

Sta

keho

lder

s ar

e in

form

ed o

f pr

ojec

t

stat

us th

roug

h in

tera

ctio

n w

ith

the

appr

opri

ate

role

man

ager

and

pro

ject

stat

us r

epor

ting

mec

hani

sms

(ST

AT

US

, qua

rter

ly r

evie

w c

heck

list

), a

nd in

fact

may

take

par

t dir

ectl

y in

EP

G a

nd P

AT

wor

k.

S

Scri

pts:

WE

EK

,

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

TA

SK

, SU

MS

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

GP

2.8

. Mon

itor

and

con

trol

the

proc

ess

agai

nst t

he p

lan

for

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

and

take

app

ropr

iate

cor

rect

ive

acti

on.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

The

team

lead

er a

nd th

e te

am a

s a

who

le m

onit

or p

erfo

rman

ce a

gain

st g

oals

and

risk

s at

the

wee

kly

team

mee

ting

(W

EE

K).

Sta

tus

agai

nst p

lan

is

revi

ewed

and

pro

ject

-spe

cifi

c ro

le m

anag

er r

epor

ts s

uppo

rt th

is a

ctiv

ity

(WE

EK

, TA

SK

, SU

MS

) fo

r th

eir

resp

ecti

ve a

reas

of

cogn

izan

ce.

ST

AT

US

repo

rts

and

quar

terl

y re

view

s en

sure

that

the

enti

re m

anag

emen

t cha

in is

awar

e of

cur

rent

per

form

ance

, iss

ues,

and

ris

ks.

D

184

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

For

ms:

PIP

, all

proc

ess

arti

fact

s

Rol

es:

Pro

cess

man

ager

GP

2.9

. O

bjec

tive

ly e

valu

ate

adhe

renc

e of

the

proc

ess

agai

nst i

ts p

roce

ss d

escr

ipti

on,

stan

dard

s, a

nd p

roce

dure

s, a

nd a

ddre

ss

nonc

ompl

ianc

e.

Oth

er:

Che

ckpo

int

revi

ew

The

pro

cess

man

ager

rol

e is

acc

ount

able

and

oft

en r

espo

nsib

le f

or e

nsur

ing

that

thes

e ac

tiviti

es ta

ke p

lace

. T

he E

PG

or

PA

T r

evie

ws

proc

ess

nonc

onfo

rman

ce is

sues

and

PIP

s at

team

mee

ting

s or

som

e ot

her

sche

dule

d

even

t, an

d m

ay e

ngag

e an

out

side

TS

P c

oach

to p

erfo

rm a

che

ckpo

int

revi

ew to

dis

cove

r is

sues

that

the

team

itse

lf m

ay n

ot b

e ab

le to

add

ress

on

its

own.

S

Scri

pts:

ST

AT

US

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

SU

MS

, SU

MP

,

SU

MQ

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s

GP

2.1

0. R

evie

w th

e ac

tivi

ties

, sta

tus,

and

resu

lts

of th

e pr

oces

s w

ith

high

er le

vel

man

agem

ent a

nd r

esol

ve is

sues

.

Oth

er:

Qua

rter

ly

revi

ew c

heck

list

The

EP

G o

r P

AT

rev

iew

s pr

ogre

ss w

eekl

y an

d ap

prop

riat

e co

rrec

tive

acti

ons

are

dete

rmin

ed a

nd e

xecu

ted.

ST

AT

US

rep

orts

are

pro

vide

d to

man

agem

ent b

ased

on

proj

ect d

ata

(WE

EK

, SU

MS

, SU

MP

, SU

MQ

).

Qua

rter

ly r

evie

ws

sum

mar

ize

proj

ect s

tatu

s fo

r se

nior

man

agem

ent.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

18

5

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

LA

U3,

PIP

For

ms:

IN

V,

TA

SK

, SU

MS

GP

3.1

. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n th

e

desc

ript

ion

of a

def

ined

pro

cess

.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, r

ole

man

ager

s (e

sp.

proc

ess

man

ager

)

Dur

ing

LA

U3,

the

team

def

ines

or

adap

ts th

e pr

oces

ses

that

they

wil

l use

duri

ng th

at p

ortio

n of

the

proj

ect.

Occ

asio

nally

, add

ition

al p

roce

sses

that

need

to b

e de

fine

d ar

e ca

ptur

ed (

INV

). I

n th

is c

ase,

task

s ar

e cr

eate

d an

d

usua

lly

assi

gned

to th

e re

leva

nt r

ole

man

ager

. The

pro

cess

man

ager

is

resp

onsi

ble

for

over

all c

oord

inat

ion

of c

reat

ion

and

mai

nten

ance

of

thes

e

task

s, e

nsur

ing

that

they

are

def

ined

, doc

umen

ted,

and

agr

eed

to b

y th

e

team

.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U,

RE

L

GP

3.2

. C

olle

ct w

ork

prod

ucts

, mea

sure

s,

mea

sure

men

t res

ults

, and

impr

ovem

ent

info

rmat

ion

deri

ved

from

pla

nnin

g an

d

perf

orm

ing

the

proc

ess

to s

uppo

rt th

e fu

ture

use

and

impr

ovem

ent o

f th

e or

gani

zati

on’s

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oces

s as

sets

.

For

ms:

TA

SK

,

SC

HE

D, L

OG

T,

LO

GD

, SU

MS

,

PIP

Bot

h du

ring

laun

ches

and

rel

aunc

hes

(LA

U, R

EL

) an

d w

hile

exe

cuti

ng

assi

gned

pro

cess

man

agem

ent t

asks

, EP

G a

nd P

AT

mem

bers

mod

el th

e

beha

vior

s th

at th

ey a

re a

skin

g of

oth

er d

evel

opm

ent p

roje

cts.

Dat

a fr

om

indi

vidu

al a

nd c

onso

lidat

ed T

SP w

orkb

ooks

(T

AS

K, S

CH

ED

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

, SU

MS

), f

rom

PIP

s, a

nd f

rom

the

man

y ot

her

gene

rate

d ar

tifac

ts

ofte

n pr

ove

pers

uasi

ve to

oth

erw

ise

relu

ctan

t dev

elop

men

t tea

ms,

esp

ecia

lly

whe

n th

ey a

re a

naly

zed

and

used

to im

prov

e th

e pr

oces

s in

the

futu

re.

S

Scri

pts:

LA

U1,

LA

U2,

LA

U3,

LA

U5,

LA

U9

GP

4.1

. E

stab

lish

and

mai

ntai

n qu

anti

tati

ve

obje

ctiv

es f

or th

e pr

oces

s th

at a

ddre

ss

qual

ity

and

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

bas

ed o

n

cust

omer

nee

ds a

nd b

usin

ess

obje

ctiv

es.

For

ms:

WE

EK

,

SU

MS

, SU

MP

,

SU

MQ

Dur

ing

a la

unch

, man

agem

ent a

nd th

e te

am e

stab

lish

qua

ntit

ativ

e ob

ject

ives

for

sele

cted

pro

cess

es, a

nd w

ork

prod

ucts

are

est

abli

shed

(L

AU

1, L

AU

2,

LA

U3,

LA

U5,

LA

U9)

and

then

mon

itor

ed (

WE

EK

, SU

MS

, SU

MP

, and

SU

MQ

) as

the

proj

ect p

lan

is e

xecu

ted,

usu

ally

by

eith

er th

e pl

anni

ng o

r

qual

ity

man

ager

s, o

r po

ssib

ly o

ne o

f th

e ot

her

role

man

ager

s as

app

ropr

iate

.

S

186

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Rol

es:

Rol

e

man

ager

s (e

sp.

plan

ning

or

proc

ess)

For

ms:

GO

AL

,

SU

MS

, TA

SK

,

LO

GT

, LO

GD

,

WE

EK

, SU

MP

,

SU

MQ

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber,

rol

e

man

ager

GP

4.2

. S

tabi

lize

the

perf

orm

ance

of

one

or

mor

e su

bpro

cess

es to

det

erm

ine

the

abil

ity

of th

e pr

oces

s to

ach

ieve

the

esta

blis

hed

quan

titat

ive

qual

ity

and

proc

ess-

perf

orm

ance

obj

ecti

ves.

Oth

er:

Ear

ned

valu

e (E

V)

char

ts, r

evie

w

rate

cha

rts,

defe

ct in

ject

ion/

rem

oval

cha

rts

TS

P te

ams

coll

ect d

ata

(SU

MS

, TA

SK

, LO

GT

, and

LO

GD

) to

ana

lyze

thei

r

perf

orm

ance

(W

EE

K, S

UM

P, S

UM

Q)

and

to m

eet p

roje

ct a

nd

orga

niza

tion

al g

oals

(G

OA

L).

The

team

lead

er, t

eam

mem

bers

, and

rol

e

man

ager

s pe

rfor

m r

elev

ant a

naly

ses

wit

h th

e ai

de o

f va

riou

s ch

arts

and

grap

hs (

see

“Oth

er”)

and

info

rm th

e te

am a

bout

pro

cess

per

form

ance

,

espe

cial

ly p

arti

cula

rly

good

or

wor

riso

me

aspe

cts,

alo

ng w

ith

reco

mm

enda

tion

s co

ncer

ning

wha

t, if

any

thin

g, to

do

abou

t the

m.

S

Scri

pts:

TE

ST

D, P

M

For

ms:

PIP

GP

5.1

. E

nsur

e co

ntin

uous

impr

ovem

ent o

f

the

proc

ess

in f

ulfi

llin

g th

e re

leva

nt

busi

ness

obj

ecti

ves

of th

e or

gani

zati

on.

Rol

es:

Tea

m

lead

er, t

eam

mem

ber

Thi

s is

the

mis

sion

of

the

EP

G a

nd it

s su

bsid

iary

PA

Ts.

Whi

le th

e

EP

G/P

AT

s pe

rfor

m T

ES

TD

act

ivit

ies

and

post

mor

tem

s (P

Ms)

and

wri

te

PIP

s fo

r th

eir

own

proc

esse

s an

d th

ose

of o

ther

TS

P te

ams

in th

e

orga

niza

tion

, the

fun

dam

enta

l und

erly

ing

obli

gati

on o

f ea

ch te

am le

ader

and

team

mem

ber

is to

ens

ure

that

the

orga

niza

tion

is le

arni

ng a

nd im

prov

ing

cons

tant

ly in

term

s of

mee

ting

its

busi

ness

obj

ecti

ves.

S

CM

U/S

EI-

2004

-TR

-014

18

7

Gen

eric

Pra

ctic

e

TSP

Ref

eren

ce

Obs

erva

tion

Rat

ing

Scri

pts:

TE

STD

G

P 5

.2.

Iden

tify

and

cor

rect

the

root

cau

ses

of d

efec

ts a

nd o

ther

pro

blem

s in

the

proc

ess.

For

ms:

SU

MS

,

TA

SK

, LO

GT

,

LO

GD

, PIP

TS

P te

ams

coll

ect d

ata

(SU

MS

, TA

SK

, LO

GT

, LO

GD

) to

sup

port

the

iden

tifi

cati

on a

nd a

naly

sis

of p

roje

ct-r

elat

ed p

robl

ems,

and

cap

ture

suc

h

prob

lem

s an

d pr

opos

ed s

olut

ions

on

PIP

s.

S

188 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014 189

References

URLs are valid as of the publication date of this document.

[Brady 04] Brady, Steve & Turner, Sherri. “The Proof is in the Project—Combining Personal and Team Process with CMMI Level 5.” SEPG 2004 (CD-ROM). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, 2004. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/presentations/sepg04.presentations/ /proof.pdf.

[Chrissis 03] Chrissis, Mary Beth; Konrad, M.; & Shrum, S. CMMI: Guidelines for Process Improvement and Product Improvement. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc., 2003.

[CMMI 02a] CMMI Product Team. CMMI for Systems Engineering/Software Engineering/Integrated Product and Process Development, Version 1.1, Staged Representation (CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD, V1.1, Staged) (CMU/SEI-2002-TR-004, ADA339221). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2002. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/02.reports /02tr004.html.

[CMMI 02b] CMMI Product Team. CMMI for Systems Engineering/Software Engineering/Integrated Product and Process Development, Version 1.1, Continuous Representation (CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD, V1.1, Continuous) (CMU/SEI-2002-TR-003, ADA339219). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2002. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/02.reports /02tr003.html.

[Davis 02] Davis, Noopur; & McHale, J. Relating the Team Software Process (TSP) to the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) for Software. (CMU/SEI-2002-TR-008, ADA404970). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2002. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/02.reports /02tr008.html.

http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/presentations/sepg04.presentations/

http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/02.reports



190 CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

[Davis 03] Davis, Noopur & Mullaney, J. The Team Software Process (TSP) in Practice: A Summary of Recent Results. (CMU/SEI-2003-TR-014, ADA418430). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2003. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/03.reports /03tr014.html.

[Hefley 02] Hefley, W.; Pracchia, L.; & Schwalb, J. “AV-8B’s Experience Using the TSP to Accelerate SW-CMM Adoption.” Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering (Sept. 2002): 5-8. http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2002/09/hefley.html.

[Humphrey 00a] Humphrey, W. Introduction to the Team Software Process. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc., 2000.

[Humphrey 00b] Humphrey, W. The Team Software Process (CMU/SEI-2000-TR-023, ADA387279). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2000. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/00.reports /00tr023.html.

[Humphrey 02] Humphrey, W. Winning with Software: An Executive Strategy. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc., 2002.

[McAndrews 00] McAndrews, Donald R. The Team Software ProcessSM (TSPSM): An Overview and Preliminary Results of Using Disciplined Practices. (CMU/SEI-2000-TR-015, ADA387260). Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2000. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/00.reports/00tr015.html.

[Pracchia 04] Pracchia, L. “The AV-8B Team Learns Synergy of EVM and TSP Accelerates Software Process Improvement.” Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering (Jan. 2004): 20-22. http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2004/01/0401pracchia.html.

[SEI 04] SEI. Process Maturity Profile: Software CMM, 2004 Mid-Year Update. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, August 2004. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/sema/pdf/CMMI/2004aug.pdf.

[Switzer 04] Switzer, J. “Integrating CMMI, TSP, and Change Management Principles to Accelerate Process Improvement.” TSP User Group, Pittsburgh, PA, Sept. 2004. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/tsp /tug-2004-presentations/switzer.pdf.


http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2002/09/hefley.html


http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/00.reports/00tr015

http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2004/01/0401pracchia.html

http://www.sei.cmu.edu/sema/pdf/CMMI/2004aug.pdf

http://www.sei.cmu.edu/tsp

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.

1. AGENCY USE ONLY

(Leave Blank)

2. REPORT DATE

April 2005

3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

Final 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Mapping TSP to CMMI

5. FUNDING NUMBERS

F19628-00-C-0003 6. AUTHOR(S)

James McHale, Daniel S. Wall 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER

CMU/SEI-2004-TR-014

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

HQ ESC/XPK 5 Eglin Street Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-2116

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

ESC-TR-2004-014

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12A DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified/Unlimited, DTIC, NTIS

12B DISTRIBUTION CODE

13. ABSTRACT (MAXIMUM 200 WORDS)

With the advent of CMMI® (Capability Maturity Model® Integration), development and maintenance organizations are faced with many issues regarding how their current practices, or new practices that they are considering adopting, compare to the new model. The Team Software ProcessSM (TSPSM), including the corequisite Personal Software ProcessSM (PSPSM), defines a set of project practices that has a growing body of evidence showing highly desirable process performance in terms of delivered product quality, schedule performance, and cost performance. TSP also has a history of favorable coverage with respect to the SW-CMM® (Capability Maturity Model for Software), a major precursor to CMMI, as well as several real-world implementations that have helped organizations to achieve high maturity levels in a relatively short period of time.

This report provides an essential element to facilitate the adoption of the TSP in organizations using CMMI, namely, a mapping of ideal TSP practices into the specific and generic practices of CMMI. By having such a mapping (also known as a gap analysis), those involved with process improvement and appraisal efforts can more easily determine how well the organization or a particular project is implementing the TSP, how well projects using TSP might rate with respect to CMMI, and where and how to fill any gaps in CMMI coverage. Organizations already following an improvement plan based on CMMI may also determine how TSP adoption might help them to achieve broader, deeper, or higher maturity implementations of CMMI goals and practices.

14. SUBJECT TERMS

CMMI, TSP, PSP, Team Software Process, Personal Software Process, software process improvement, gap analysis

15. NUMBER OF PAGES

209

16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

OF REPORT

Unclassified

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

Unclassified

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF ABSTRACT

Unclassified

20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

UL

NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18 298-102

Mapping TSP to CMMI - Carnegie Mellon University · 2005-04-01 · Mapping TSP to CMMI James McHale...

Documents

Transcript of Mapping TSP to CMMI - Carnegie Mellon University · 2005-04-01 · Mapping TSP to CMMI James McHale...