A Management Maturity Model (MMM) for project-based organisational performance assessment

Common sense suggests that organisations are more likely to deliver successful projects if they have systems in place that reflect a mature project environment based on a culture of continuous improvement. This paper develops and discusses a Management Maturity Model (MMM) to assess the maturity of project management organisations through a customisable, systematic, strategic and practical methodology inspired from the seminal work of Darwin, Deming, Drucker and Daniel. The model presented is relevant to organisations, such as construction and engineering companies, that prefer to use the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK™ Guide) published by the Project Management Institute (PMI), but without the disadvantages of excessive time and cost commitments and a ‘one size fits all’ approach linked to rigid increments of maturity. It offers a game-changing advance in the application of project-based organisational performance assessment compared to existing market solutions that are unnecessarily complex. The feasibility of MMM is field-tested using a medium-sized data centre infrastructure firm in Tehran

Process capability assessments in small development firms

[Abstract}: Assessment-based Software Process Improvement (SPI) programs such as the Capability Maturity Model (CMM), Bootstrap, and SPICE (ISO/IEC 15504) are based on formal frameworks and promote the use of systematic processes and management practices for software development. These approaches identify best practices for the management of software development and when applied, enable organizations to understand, control and improve development processes. The purpose of a SPI assessment is to compare the current processes used in an organization with a list of recommended or ‘best’ practices. This research investigates the adoption of SPI initiatives by four small software development firms. These four firms participated in a process improvement program which was sponsored by Software Engineering Australia (SEA) (Queensland). The assessment method was based on SPICE (ISO/IEC 15504) and included an initial assessment, recommendations, and a follow-up meeting. For each firm, before and after snapshots are provided of the capability as assessed on eight processes. The discussion which follows summarizes the improvements realized and considers the critical success factors relating to SPI adoption for small firms

System implementation: managing project and post project stage - case study in an Indonesian company

The research reported in this paper aims to get a better\ud understanding of how the implementation process of\ud enterprise systems (ES) can be managed, by studying the\ud process from an organisational perspective. A review of\ud the literature on previous research in ES implementation\ud has been carried out and the state of the art of ES\ud implementation research is defined. Using several body of\ud literature, an organisational view on ES implementation is\ud described, explaining that ES implementation involves\ud challenges from triple domain, namely technological\ud challenge, business process related challenge, and\ud organisational challenge. Based on the defined state of the\ud art and the organisational view on ES implementation\ud developed in this research, a research framework is\ud presented, addressing the project as well as the postproject\ud stage, and a number of essential issues within the\ud stages. System alignment, knowledge acquisition, change\ud mobilisation are the essntial issues to be studied in the\ud project stage while institutionalisation effort and\ud continuous improvement facilitation are to be studied in\ud the post-project stage. Case studies in Indonesian\ud companies are used to explain the framework

Transforming failure into success through organisational learning: An analysis of a manufacturing information system

This paper describes the idiosyncracies of a case study company, through highlighting issues and problems experienced during their attempts to evaluate, implement and realise the holistic implications of a manufacturing information system. Although the Information System (IS) was operational for a period of time, it was eventually deemed a failure. The reason for this was that a range of human and organisational factors prevented the organisation from embracing the full impact of the system. The eventual success of their information system was realised through a bespoke implementation, based upon a traditional systems development lifecycle that indirectly addressed learning issues following the earlier failed deployment. The paper highlights key issues relating to business success and failure, and then contrasts them alongside the presented case study. In doing so, the authors conclude by proposing methods through which manufacturing information systems can be transformed for business success. This is described achievable through both a realisation in the positioning of the organisation relative to technology management, and the related mapping of human and technological constructs that support information systems related succes

Culture dimensions in software development industry: The effects of mentoring

Software development is a human centric and sociotechnical activity and like all human activities is influenced by cultural factors. However, software engineering is being further affected because of the globalization in software development. As a result, cultural diversity is influencing software development and its outcomes. The software engineering industry, a very intensive industry regarding human capital, is facing a new era in which software development personnel must adapt to multicultural work environments. Today, many organizations present a multicultural workforce which needs to be managed. This paper analyzes the influence of culture on mentoring relationships within the software engineering industry. Two interesting findings can be concluded from our study: (1) cultural differences affect both formal and informal mentoring, and (2) technical competences are not improved when implementing mentoring relationships