Don Dwiggins wrote:
>Actually, I'd be interested to hear what some of the people on this list
>think of the model at various levels. Is a "maturity model" appropriate
>as a basis for structuring the "learning work" of an organization? What
>are the strengths and weaknesses of this one with regard to "people
>management"?
Don,
My experience with the SEI models is inclusive. For some, the model
provides a logical, helpful construct. For others, the model gets in the
way of understanding the underlying processes and for some, the model is
derided simply because it is a model. Part of this differential surely
comes from different learning and conceptual styles; people vary
considerably on their reaction to abstractions. Another part feels like a
defense mechanism. The SEI Software Process Improvement program begins
with an assessment. The assessment finds compliance and non-compliance
with key process and management attributes. The assignment of a maturity
is sure to raise some defensiveness. After all, who wants to be known as
immature.
Personally, I like both the CMM and the People Capability Maturity Model,
but then I tend to like abstractions as tools for deeper understanding.
Mike.....
--"Michael A. Gort" <mail18081@pop.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>