text:
Capability Maturity Model Integration
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Software development
Core activities
Processes
Requirements
Design
Engineering
Construction
Testing
Debugging
Deployment
Maintenance
Paradigms and models
Agile
Cleanroom
Incremental
Prototyping
Spiral
V model
Waterfall
Methodologies and frameworks
ASD
DevOps
DAD
DSDM
FDD
IID
Kanban
Lean SD
LeSS
MDD
MSF
PSP
RAD
SAFe
Scrum
SEMAT
TSP
UP
XP
Supporting disciplines
Configuration management
Documentation
Software quality assurance (SQA)
Project management
User experience
Practices
ATDD
BDD
CCO
CI
CD
DDD
PP
Stand-up
TDD
Tools
Compiler
Debugger
Profiler
GUI designer
Modeling
IDE
Build automation
Release automation
Infrastructure as Code
Testing
Standards and Bodies of Knowledge
BABOK
CMMI
IEEE standards
ISO 9001
ISO/IEC standards
PMBOK
SWEBOK
v
t
e
"CMMI" redirects here. For the US government organization, see Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation.
Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is a process level improvement training and appraisal program. Administered by the CMMI Institute, a subsidiary of ISACA, it was developed at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU). It is required by many United States Department of Defense (DoD) and U.S. Government contracts, especially in software development. CMU claims CMMI can be used to guide process improvement across a project, division, or an entire organization. CMMI defines the following maturity levels for processes: Initial, Managed, Defined, Quantitatively Managed, and Optimizing. Version 1.3 was published in 2010. CMMI is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by CMU.[1]
Contents
[hide]
1 Overview
2 History
3 CMMI topics
3.1 Representation
3.2 Model framework
3.3 Maturity levels for services
3.4 Models
3.5 Appraisal
3.6 Security
4 Applications
5 See also
6 References
7 Official sources
8 External links
Overview[edit]
Characteristics of the Maturity levels.[2]
CMMI addresses three areas of interest:
Product and service development — CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV),
Service establishment, management, — CMMI for Services (CMMI-SVC), and
Product and service acquisition — CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ).
CMMI was developed by a group from industry, government, and the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at CMU. CMMI models provide guidance for developing or improving processes that meet the business goals of an organization. A CMMI model may also be used as a framework for appraising the process maturity of the organization.[2] By January 2013, the entire CMMI product suite was transferred from the SEI to the CMMI Institute, a newly created organization at Carnegie Mellon.[3]
CMMI originated in software engineering but has been highly generalized over the years to embrace other areas of interest, such as the development of hardware products, the delivery of all kinds of services, and the acquisition of products and services. The word "software" does not appear in definitions of CMMI. This generalization of improvement concepts makes CMMI extremely abstract. It is not as specific to software engineering as its predecessor, the Software CMM (CMM, see below).
History[edit]
CMMI was developed by the CMMI project, which aimed to improve the usability of maturity models by integrating many different models into one framework. The project consisted of members of industry, government and the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute (SEI). The main sponsors included the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the National Defense Industrial Association.
CMMI is the successor of the capability maturity model (CMM) or Software CMM. The CMM was developed from 1987 until 1997. In 2002, version 1.1 was released, version 1.2 followed in August 2006, and version 1.3 in November 2010. Some major changes in CMMI V1.3 [4] are the support of agile software development,[5] improvements to high maturity practices[6] and alignment of the representation (staged and continuous).[7]
According to the Software Engineering Institute (SEI, 2008), CMMI helps "integrate traditionally separate organizational functions, set process improvement goals and priorities, provide guidance for quality processes, and provide a point of reference for appraising current processes."[8]
In March 2016, the CMMI Institute was acquired by ISACA.
In March 2018 CMMI 2.0 was introduced, not free for the first time in CMMI history: the cheapest option was 1-week access to the online version at US$150.00.
CMMI topics[edit]
Representation[edit]
CMMI exists in two representations: continuous and staged.[2] The continuous representation is designed to allow the user to focus on the specific processes that are considered important for the organization's immediate business objectives, or those to which the organization assigns a high degree of risks. The staged representation is designed to provide a standard sequence of improvements, and can serve as a basis for comparing the maturity of different projects and organizations. The staged representation also provides for an easy migration from the SW-CMM to CMMI.[2]
Model framework[edit]
Further information: Process area (CMMI)
Depending on the areas of interest (acquisition, services, development) used, the process areas it contains will vary.[9] Process areas are the areas that will be covered by the organization's processes. The table below lists the seventeen CMMI core process areas that are present for all CMMI areas of interest in version 1.3.
Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Core Process Areas
Abbreviation
Name
Area
Maturity Level
CAR Causal Analysis and Resolution Support 5
CM Configuration Management Support 2
DAR Decision Analysis and Resolution Support 3
IPM Integrated Project Management Project Management 3
MA Measurement and Analysis Support 2
OPD Organizational Process Definition Process Management 3
OPF Organizational Process Focus Process Management 3
OPM Organizational Performance Management Process Management 5
OPP Organizational Process Performance Process Management 4
OT Organizational Training Process Management 3
PMC Project Monitoring and Control Project Management 2
PP Project Planning Project Management 2
PPQA Process and Product Quality Assurance Support 2
QPM Quantitative Project Management Project Management 4
REQM Requirements Management Project Management 2
RSKM Risk Management Project Management 3
SAM Supplier Agreement Management Support 2
Maturity levels for services[edit]
The process areas below and their maturity levels are listed for the CMMI for services model:
Maturity Level 2 - Managed
CM - Configuration Management
MA - Measurement and Analysis
PPQA - Process and Quality Assurance
REQM - Requirements Management
SAM - Supplier Agreement Management
SD - Service Delivery
WMC - Work Monitoring and Control
WP - Work Planning
Maturity Level 3 - Defined
CAM - Capacity and Availability Management
DAR - Decision Analysis and Resolution
IRP - Incident Resolution and Prevention
IWM - Integrated Work Managements
OPD - Organizational Process Definition
OPF - Organizational Process Focus...
OT - Organizational Training
RSKM - Risk Management
SCON - Service Continuity
SSD - Service System Development
SST - Service System Transition
STSM - Strategic Service Management
Maturity Level 4 - Quantitatively Managed
OPP - Organizational Process Performance
QWM - Quantitative Work Management
Maturity Level 5 - Optimizing
CAR - Causal Analysis and Resolution
OPM - Organizational Performance Management.
Models[edit]
CMMI best practices are published in documents called models, each of which addresses a different area of interest. Version 1.3 provides models for three areas of interest: development, acquisition, and services.
CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV), v1.3 was released in November 2010. It addresses product and service development processes.
CMMI for Acquisition (CMMI-ACQ), v1.3 was released in November 2010. It addresses supply chain management, acquisition, and outsourcing processes in government and industry.
CMMI for Services (CMMI-SVC), v1.3 was released in November 2010. It addresses guidance for delivering services within an organization and to external customers.
Appraisal[edit]
An organization cannot be certified in CMMI; instead, an organization is appraised. Depending on the type of appraisal, the organization can be awarded a maturity level rating (1-5) or a capability level achievement profile.
Many organizations find value in measuring their progress by conducting an appraisal. Appraisals are typically conducted for one or more of the following reasons:
To determine how well the organization’s processes compare to CMMI best practices, and to identify areas where improvement can be made
To inform external customers and suppliers of how well the organization’s processes compare to CMMI best practices
To meet the contractual requirements of one or more customers
Appraisals of organizations using a CMMI model[10] must conform to the requirements defined in the Appraisal Requirements for CMMI (ARC) document. There are three classes of appraisals, A, B and C, which focus on identifying improvement opportunities and comparing the organization’s processes to CMMI best practices. Of these, class A appraisal is the most formal and is the only one that can result in a level rating. Appraisal teams use a CMMI model and ARC-conformant appraisal method to guide their evaluation of the organization and their reporting of conclusions. The appraisal results can then be used (e.g., by a process group) to plan improvements for the organization.
The Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) is an appraisal method that meets all of the ARC requirements.[11] Results of a SCAMPI appraisal may be published (if the appraised organization approves) on the CMMI Web site of the SEI: Published SCAMPI Appraisal Results. SCAMPI also supports the conduct of ISO/IEC 15504, also known as SPICE (Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination), assessments etc.
This approach promotes that members of the EPG and PATs be trained in the CMMI, that an informal (SCAMPI C) appraisal be performed, and that process areas be prioritized for improvement. More modern approaches, that involve the deployment of commercially available, CMMI-compliant processes, can significantly reduce the time to achieve compliance. SEI has maintained statistics on the "time to move up" for organizations adopting the earlier Software CMM as well as CMMI.[12] These statistics indicate that, since 1987, the median times to move from Level 1 to Level 2 is 23 months, and from Level 2 to Level 3 is an additional 20 months. Since the release of the CMMI, the median times to move from Level 1 to Level 2 is 5 months, with median movement to Level 3 another 21 months. These statistics are updated and published every six months in a maturity profile.[citation needed]
The Software Engineering Institute’s (SEI) team software process methodology and the use of CMMI models can be used to raise the maturity level. A new product called Accelerated Improvement Method[13] (AIM) combines the use of CMMI and the TSP.[14]
Security[edit]
To address user security concerns, two unofficial security guides are available. Considering the Case for Security Content in CMMI for Services has one process area, Security Management.[15] Security by Design with CMMI for Development, Version 1.3 has the following process areas:
OPSD - Organizational Preparedness for Secure Development
SMP - Secure Management in Projects
SRTS - Security Requirements and Technical Solution
SVV - Security Verification and Validation
While they do not affect maturity or capability levels, these process areas can be reported in appraisal results.[16]
Applications[edit]
The SEI published that 60 organizations measured increases of performance in the categories of cost, schedule, productivity, quality and customer satisfaction.[17] The median increase in performance varied between 14% (customer satisfaction) and 62% (productivity). However, the CMMI model mostly deals with what processes should be implemented, and not so much with how they can be implemented. These results do not guarantee that applying CMMI will increase performance in every organization. A small company with few resources may be less likely to benefit from CMMI; this view is supported by the process maturity profile (page 10). Of the small organizations (<25 employees), 70.5% are assessed at level 2: Managed, while 52.8% of the organizations with 1,001–2,000 employees are rated at the highest level (5: Optimizing).
Turner & Jain (2002) argue that although it is obvious there are large differences between CMMI and agile software development, both approaches have much in common. They believe neither way is the 'right' way to develop software, but that there are phases in a project where one of the two is better suited. They suggest one should combine the different fragments of the methods into a new hybrid method. Sutherland et al. (2007) assert that a combination of Scrum and CMMI brings more adaptability and predictability than either one alone. David J. Anderson (2005) gives hints on how to interpret CMMI in an agile manner.
CMMI Roadmaps,[18] which are a goal-driven approach to selecting and deploying relevant process areas from the CMMI-DEV model, can provide guidance and focus for effective CMMI adoption. There are several CMMI roadmaps for the continuous representation, each with a specific set of improvement goals. Examples are the CMMI Project Roadmap,[19] CMMI Product and Product Integration Roadmaps [20] and the CMMI Process and Measurements Roadmaps.[21] These roadmaps combine the strengths of both the staged and the continuous representations.
The combination of the project management technique earned value management (EVM) with CMMI has been described (Solomon, 2002). To conclude with a similar use of CMMI, Extreme Programming (XP), a software engineering method, has been evaluated with CMM/CMMI (Nawrocki et al., 2002). For example, the XP requirements management approach, which relies on oral communication, was evaluated as not compliant with CMMI.
CMMI can be appraised using two different approaches: staged and continuous. The staged approach yields appraisal results as one of five maturity levels. The continuous approach yields one of four capability levels. The differences in these approaches are felt only in the appraisal; the best practices are equivalent and result in equivalent process improvement results.
See also[edit]
Software Engineering Process Group
Capability Immaturity Model
Capability Maturity Model
Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework
People Capability Maturity Model
Process area (CMMI)
References[edit]
Jump up ^ "Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS)". tmsearch.uspto.gov. Retrieved 2016-12-21.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Sally Godfrey (2008) [software.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/What%20is%20CMMI.ppt What is CMMI ?]. NASA presentation. Accessed 8 dec 2008.
Jump up ^ [1]
Jump up ^ Major changes in CMMI Version 1.3
Jump up ^ CMMI V1.3: Agile
Jump up ^ CMMI V1.3, High Maturity Practices Clarified
Jump up ^ Deploying the CMMI V1.3
Jump up ^ CMMI Overview. Software Engineering Institute. Accessed 16 February 2011.
Jump up ^ Overview of the CMMI Version 1.3 Process Areas
Jump up ^ For the latest published CMMI appraisal results see the SEI Web site Archived 6 February 2007 at the Wayback Machine..
Jump up ^ "Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPISM) A, Version 1.2: Method Definition Document". CMU/SEI-2006-HB-002. Software Engineering Institute. 2006. Retrieved 23 September 2006.
Jump up ^ "Process Maturity Profile". Retrieved 2011-02-16.
Jump up ^ http://www.sei.cmu.edu/process/high-performance.cfm
Jump up ^ http://www.sei.cmu.edu/tsp/
Jump up ^ Eileer Forrester and Kieran Doyle. Considering the Case for Security Content in CMMI for Services (October 2010)
Jump up ^ Siemens AG Corporate Technology. Security by Design with CMMI for Development, Version 1.3, (May 2013)
Jump up ^ "CMMI Performance Results of CMMI". Retrieved 2006-09-23.
Jump up ^ CMMI Roadmaps
Jump up ^ CMMI Project Roadmap
Jump up ^ CMMI Product and Product Integration Roadmaps
Jump up ^ CMMI Process and Measurements Roadmaps
Official sources[edit]
SEI reports
"CMMI for Development, Version 1.3" (PDF). CMMI-DEV (Version 1.3, November 2010). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2010. Retrieved 16 February 2011.
"CMMI for Acquisition, Version 1.3" (PDF). CMMI-ACQ (Version 1.3, November 2010). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2010. Retrieved 16 February 2011.
"CMMI for Services, Version 1.3" (PDF). CMMI-SVC (Version 1.3, November 2010). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2010. Retrieved 16 February 2011.
"Process Maturity Profile (Current and Past Releases)" (PDF). CMMI for Development SCAMPI Class A Appraisal Results. Software Engineering Institute. Retrieved 16 February 2011.
"Appraisal Requirements for CMMI, Version 1.2 (ARC, V1.2)" (PDF). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2006. Retrieved 16 February 2011.
"Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) A Version 1.2: Method Definition Document" (doc). Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. 2006. Retrieved 22 August 2006.
CMMI Guidebook Acquirer Team (2007). "Understanding and Leveraging a Supplier's CMMI Efforts: A Guidebook for Acquirers" (PDF). CMU/SEI-2007-TR-004. Software Engineering Institute. Retrieved 23 August 2007.
SEI Web pages
"CMMI Version 1.3 Information Center". Software Engineering Institute. 2011. Retrieved 16 February 2011.
"SEI Partner List". Software Engineering Institute. Retrieved 28 October 2006.
"Optimiza formal announcement as CMMI-L3 and published on SEI website". Software Engineering Institute. Retrieved 15 March 2011.
SCAMPI Appraisal Results. The complete SEI list of published SCAMPI appraisal results.
External links[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Capability Maturity Model Integration.
CMMI Institute, official website
Capability Maturity Model Integration at Curlie (based on DMOZ)
[show]
v
t
e
Carnegie Mellon University
Academics
College of Engineering
College of Fine Arts
Dietrich College of Humanities and Social Sciences
H. John Heinz III College of Information Systems and Public Policy
Mellon College of Science
School of Computer Science
Tepper School of Business
Margaret Morrison Carnegie College (defunct)
Branch campuses
Australia
Qatar
Rwanda
Silicon Valley
Student life
Traditions
Greek Life
Scotch'n'Soda
Miller Gallery
The Tartan
WRCT
University Athletic Association
Research
Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center
Software Engineering Institute
Robotics Institute
Human Computer Interaction Institute
Computational Biology Department
Language Technologies Institute
Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse
Carnegie School
People
Andrew Carnegie
Mellon family
Alumni and faculty
Projects and legacies
Alice
Andrew Project
BLISS
CMMI
Mach
3M computer
Center for PostNatural History
Conflict Kitchen
Robot Hall of Fame
Waffle Shop: A Reality Show
YinzCam
[show]
v
t
e
Software engineering
Fields
Computer programming
Requirements engineering
Software deployment
Software design
Software maintenance
Software testing
Systems analysis
Formal methods
Concepts
Data modeling
Enterprise architecture
Functional specification
Modeling language
Orthogonality
Programming paradigm
Software
Software archaeology
Software architecture
Software configuration management
Software development methodology
Software development process
Software quality
Software quality assurance
Software verification and validation
Structured analysis
Orientations
Agile
Aspect-oriented
Object orientation
Ontology
Service orientation
SDLC
Models
Developmental
Agile
EUP
Executable UML
Incremental model
Iterative model
Prototype model
RAD
UP
Scrum
Spiral model
V-Model
Waterfall model
XP
Other
SPICE
CMMI
Data model
ER model
Function model
Information model
Metamodeling
Object model
Systems model
View model
Languages
IDEF
UML
USL
SysML
Software
engineers
Victor Basili
Kent Beck
Grady Booch
Fred Brooks
Barry Boehm
Peter Chen
Danese Cooper
Ward Cunningham
Tom DeMarco
Edsger W. Dijkstra
Delores M. Etter
Martin Fowler
Adele Goldstine
Margaret Hamilton
C. A. R. Hoare
Lois Haibt
Mary Jean Harrold
Grace Hopper
Watts Humphrey
Michael A. Jackson
Ivar Jacobson
Alan Kay
Nancy Leveson
Stephen J. Mellor
Bertrand Meyer
David Parnas
Trygve Reenskaug
Winston W. Royce
James Rumbaugh
Mary Shaw
Peri Tarr
Elaine Weyuker
Niklaus Wirth
Edward Yourdon
Related fields
Computer science
Computer engineering
Project management
Risk management
Systems engineering
Category
Commons
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Capability_Maturity_Model_Integration&oldid=836170044"
Categories:
Maturity models
Software development process
Standards
Carnegie Mellon University software
Hidden categories:
Webarchive template wayback links
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from November 2013
Articles with Curlie links
Use dmy dates from February 2011
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
العربية
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
Français
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
עברית
Magyar
日本語
Norsk
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
Português
Русский
Slovenčina
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
中文
14 more
Edit links
This page was last edited on 13 April 2018, at 02:27.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: th

value: tr

value: li

values:
/wiki/Software_development_methodology
mw-redirect
Software development methodology

values:
/wiki/Model-driven_development
mw-redirect
Model-driven development

values:
/wiki/Continuous_Integration
mw-redirect
Continuous Integration

values:
/wiki/Continuous_Delivery
mw-redirect
Continuous Delivery

values:
/wiki/Pair_Programming
mw-redirect
Pair Programming

values: A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge

values: Template talk:Software development process

values: float:right;clear:right;width:22.0em;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%

values: Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation

values:
/wiki/Capability_maturity_model
mw-redirect
Capability maturity model

values:
background:lightblue
headerSort
0
columnheader button
Sort ascending

values:
wikitable sortable jquery-tablesorter
background:lightyellow

values: Edit section: Maturity levels for services

values:
nofollow
https://sas.cmmiinstitute.com/pars/
external text

values:
/wiki/The_SPICE_project
mw-redirect
The SPICE project

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (November 2013)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Extreme_Programming
mw-redirect
Extreme Programming

values: Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework

values:
nofollow
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/
external autonumber

values:
nofollow
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://sas.sei.cmu.edu/pars/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/tsp/
external free

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values: commons:Category:Capability Maturity Model Integration

values:
nofollow
external text
http://cmmiinstitute.com

values: background-color:#990000;color:white;-moz-box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #464646, inset -2px -2px 0 #464646; -webkit-box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #464646, inset -2px -2px 0 #464646; box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #464646, inset -2px -2px 0 #464646;;;background:none transparent;border:none;-moz-box-shadow:none;-webkit-box-shadow:none;box-shadow:none;

values: Template talk:Carnegie Mellon University

values: background-color:#990000;color:white;-moz-box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #464646, inset -2px -2px 0 #464646; -webkit-box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #464646, inset -2px -2px 0 #464646; box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #464646, inset -2px -2px 0 #464646;;width:1%

values: Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science

values: Andrew Carnegie, three-quarter length portrait, seated, facing slightly left, 1913.jpg

values:
navbox-image
6
width:1px;padding:0px 0px 0px 2px

values: Carnegie Mellon University Rwanda (page does not exist)

values: Fraternities and sororities at Carnegie Mellon University

values: Miller Gallery at Carnegie Mellon University

values: Carnegie Mellon Human Computer Interaction Institute

values: List of Carnegie Mellon University people

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Carnegie Mellon University software

values: Category:Webarchive template wayback links

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from November 2013

values: Category:Use dmy dates from February 2011

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values: تكامل نموذج نضوج المقدرة – Arabic

values: Integració de Models de Maduresa de Capacitats – Catalan

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ca
display: none;

values:
https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Czech
cs
cs
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-cs
display: none;

values: Capability Maturity Model Integration – German

values: Capability Maturity Model Integration – Spanish

values: Capability Maturity Model Integration – French

values: 능력 성숙도 통합 모델 – Korean

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ko
display: none;

values:
https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Indonesian
id
id
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Hebrew
he
he
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-he
display: none;

values:
https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Hungarian
hu
hu
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-hu
display: none;

values: 能力成熟度モデル統合 – Japanese

values: Capability Maturity Model Integration – Norwegian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-no
display: none;

values:
https://uz.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Uzbek
uz
uz
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-uz
display: none;

values:
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Portuguese
pt
pt
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Russian
ru
ru
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Slovak
sk
sk
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-sk
display: none;

values:
https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Finnish
fi
fi
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-fi
display: none;

values: Capability Maturity Model Integration – Swedish

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-sv
display: none;

values: ஒருங்கிணைந்த செயல்வல்லமை முதிர்ச்சி ஒப்புரு – Tamil

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ta
display: none;

values: Capability Maturity Model Integration – Thai

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-th
display: none;

values:
https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Turkish
tr
tr
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-tr
display: none;

values:
https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMMI
CMMI – Ukrainian
uk
uk
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-uk
display: none;

values: 能力成熟度模型集成 – Chinese

values: All languages (initial selection from common choices by you and others)

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Capability_Maturity_Model_Integration rootpage-Capability_Maturity_Model_Integration skin-vector action-view