This Article 
   
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
Identifying Extensions Required by RUP (Rational Unified Process) to Comply with CMM (Capability Maturity Model) Levels 2 and 3
February 2003 (vol. 29 no. 2)
pp. 181-192

Abstract—This paper describes an assessment of the Rational Unified Process (RUP) based on the Capability Maturity Model (CMM). For each key practice (KP) identified in each key process area (KPA) of CMM levels 2 and 3, the Rational Unified Process was assessed to determine whether it satisfied the KP or not. For each KPA, the percentage of the key practices supported was calculated, and the results were tabulated. The report includes considerations about the coverage of each key process area, describing the highlights of the Rational Unified Process regarding its support for CMM levels 2 and 3, and suggests where an organization using it will need to complement it to conform to CMM. The assessment resulted in the elaboration of proposals to enhance the Rational Unified Process in order to satisfy the key process areas of CMM. Some of these are briefly described in this article.

[1] A.A. Alcântara, T.M.M. Maciel, S.L. Meira, and F.Q.B. da Silva, “Uso do Processo RUP na Implantação da ISO 9000-3,“ Proc. Sixth Workshop Qualidade de Software, pp. 60-71, 1999.
[2] A. April and F. Coallier, “Trillium: Model for Telecom Product Development and Support Process Capability,“ Proc. Second IEEE Software Eng. Standards Symp., Aug. 1995.
[3] J. Boegh et al., "A Method for Software Quality Planning, Control, and Evaluation," IEEE Software, Vol. 16, No. 2, Mar./Apr. 1999, pp. 69-77.
[4] G. Booch, Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1994.
[5] G. Booch, J. Rumbaugh, and I. Jacobson, The Unified Modeling Language User Guide. Addison Wesley, 1999.
[6] B. Fitzgerald and T. O'Kane, “A Longitudinal Study of Software Process Improvement,“ IEEE Software, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 37-45, May 1999.
[7] V. Haase, G. Koch, H.J. Kugler, and P. Decrinis, “Bootstrap: Fine-Tuning Process Assessment,“ IEEE Software, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 25-35, July 1994.
[8] B. Henderson-Sellers, R. Dué, and I. Graham, “Third Generation OO Processes: A Critique of RUP and OPEN from a Project Management Perspective,“ Proc. Seventh Asia-Pacific Software Eng. Conf. (APSEC' 2000), pp. 428-435, 2000.
[9] J. Herbsleb, A. Carleton, J. Rozum, J. Siegel, and D. Zubrow, “Benefits of CMM-Based Software Process Improvement Initial Results,” Technical Report CMM/SEI-94-TR-13, Software Eng. Inst., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, Penn., 1994, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/94.reports/ pdftr13.94.pdf.
[10] ISO 9000-3, “ISO 9000-3 Guidelines for the Application of ISO 9001 to the Development, Supply, and Maintenance of Software,” Int'l Standards Organization, Geneva, 1991, http:/www.iso.org/.
[11] ISO/IEC 12207, “ISO/IEC 12207 Information Technology—Software Life-Cycle Processes,” Int'l Standards Organization, Geneva, 1995, http:/www.iso.org/.
[12] I. Jacobson, G. Booch, and J. Rumbaugh, The Unified Software Development Process, Addison-Wesley, Boston, 1999.
[13] I. Jacobson, M. Christerson, P. Jonsson, and G. Overgaard, Object-Oriented Software Engineering: A Use Case-Driven Approach. Addison-Wesley, 1992.
[14] P. Kruchten, The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction, 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 2000.
[15] E.G. McGuire, “Initial Effects of Software Process Improvement on an Experienced Software Development Team,“ Proc. 29th Ann. Hawaii Int'l Conf. System Sciences, pp. 713-721, 1998.
[16] M. Paulk, “Effective CMM-Based Process Improvement,“ Proc. Sixth Int'l Conf. Software Quality (ICSQ'96), pp. 226-237, 1996.
[17] M. Paulk, B. Curtis, M. Chrissis, and C. Weber, “Capability Maturity Model for Software,” Version 1.1, Technical Report CMU/SEI-93-TR-24, Software Eng. Inst., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, Penn., 1993, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/93.reports/ pdftr24.93.pdf.
[18] M. Paulk et al., “Key Practices of Capability Maturity Model for Software,” Version 1.1, Technical Report CMU/SEI-93-TR-25, Software Eng. Inst., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, Penn., 1993, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/93.reports/ pdftr25.93.pdf.
[19] CMMI Product Team, “Capability Maturity Model, Integration (CMMI),” Version 1.1, Technical Report CMU/SEI-2002-TR-011, Software Eng. Inst., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, Penn., Mar. 2002, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/02.reports/ pdf02tr011.pdf.
[20] Project Management Institute, Inc., “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge,” 2000 ed., 2000, http:/www.pmi.org.
[21] Rational Software Corporation, “Rational Unified Process,” Version 2001.3, CD-ROM, Rational Software, Cupertino, Calif.: 2001.
[22] Rational Software Corporation, “Rational Unified Process,” Version 5.5, CD-ROM, Rational Software, Cupertino, Calif.: 1999.
[23] Rational Software Corporation, “Rational Unified Process Best Practices for Software Development Teams,” White Paper, 1998, http://www.rational.com/media/whitepapers rup_bestpractices.pdf.
[24] Rational Software Corporation, “Assessing the Rational Unified Process against ISO/IEC15504-5: Information Technology—Software Process Assessment Part 5: An Assessment Model and Indicator Guidance,” White Paper, 2000, http://www.rational.com/products/whitepapers rup_iso.jsp.
[25] C.L. Chang, R.A. Stachowitz, and J.B. Combs, “Validation of Nonmonotonic Knowledge-Based Systems,” Proc. IEEE Int'l Conf. Tools for Artificial Intelligence, Nov. 1990.
[26] ISO/IEC 15504, “Information Technology—Software Process Assessment—Part 1: Concepts and Introductory Guide,” Technical Report ISO/IEC TR 15504-1:1998, Int'l Standards Organization, JTC 1/SC 7, 1998, http:/www.iso.org/.
[27] J. Smith, “Reaching CMM Level 2 and 3 with the Rational Unified Process,” White Paper, 2000, http://www.rational.com/products/whitepapers 100416.jsp.
[28] R.W. Reitzig, C. Rodriguez, and G. Holt, “Achieving Capability Maturity Model Level 2 with Rational Unified Process,” Rational White Paper, 2002, http://www.cognence.comAchievingCMMLevel2.pdf .
[29] M.P. Ginsberg and L.H. Quinn, “Process Tailoring and the Software Capability Maturity Model,” Technical Report CMU/SEI-94-TR-024, Software Eng. Inst., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, Penn. 1995, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/94.reports/ pdftr24.94.pdf.
[30] M.E.C. Hull, P.S. Taylor, J.R.P. Hanna, and R.J. Millar, “Software Development Processes—An Assessment,“ Information and Software Technology, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 1-12, Jan. 2002.
[31] B. Henderson-Sellers, G. Collins, R. Dué, and I.M. Graham, “A Qualitative Comparison of Two Processes for Object-Oriented Software Development,“ Information and Software Technology, vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 705-724, Dec. 2001.
[32] A. Fugetta, "Software Process: A Roadmap," The Future of Software Engineering 2000, Proc. 22nd Int'l Conf. Software Engineering, ACM Press, New York, 2000, pp. 25-34.
[33] L.V. Manzoni, “Using a Workflow Management System to Support Software Development Based on Extended Rational Unified Process to Reach Maturity Model Levels 2 and 3,” master dissertation, Inst. of Informatics, Federal Univ. of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2001, http://www.inf.ufrgs.br/amadeus/atuaislisandra.html .

Index Terms:
Capability Maturity Model, CMM, process assessment model, Rational Unified Process, RUP, software process, software quality, Unified Modeling Language, UML.
Citation:
Lisandra V. Manzoni, Roberto T. Price, "Identifying Extensions Required by RUP (Rational Unified Process) to Comply with CMM (Capability Maturity Model) Levels 2 and 3," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 181-192, Feb. 2003, doi:10.1109/TSE.2003.1178058
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.