A km maturity model for the software industry

The software process for both management and engineering activities is documented, standardized, and integrated into all processes for the organization. Detailed measures of the software process and product quality are collected. Both the software process and products are quantitatively understood and controlled. Continuous process improvement is enabled by quantitative feedback from the process and from piloting innovative ideas and technologies.

A big difference however is that CMMI offers two representations of the maturity of the processes. CMMI offers a staged representation with five maturity levels just like the Software CMM and a continuous model where each process area has its own maturity level. 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 to 5 or a capability level achievement profile. The original Capability Maturity Model CMM was originated to meet the needs of improving and managing the quality of the services in any organization. Knowledge is classified into explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge.

In contrast, tacit knowledge is highly personal. It is possible to convert certain percentage of the tacit knowledge into explicit by suitable knowledge elicitation methods. A maturity model provides a guiding road map. This paper reviews the literature on Knowledge Management Maturity KMM models and proposes a new model which combines the strengths of the existing models and eliminates their inadequacies.

The inadequacy only indicates that the feature is not explicitly mentioned in the referred literature. The paper is organized as follows. The first section reviews maturity models in general and KMM models in particular. The second section describes the new KMM model. The third section details the unique features of the new model. The fourth section dwells on the conclusion and the future work. Maturity models describe the development of an entity over time.

The entity can be anything of interest. It can be a human being, an organization, a technology, a product, a process etc. Maturity model gives a path to improvement.

Maturity Model can also be used as a basis for comparison Klimko , Maturity models are driven by the necessity to have a clear cut road map for any organization that is embarking on knowledge management implementation. It provides the clear vision with a description of the path ahead. Knowledge Management Maturity Model KMMM can be considered as an application of structured approach to knowledge management implementation.

IEEE Standard Maturity model can also provide a common understanding of the terminologies involved in knowledge management implementation to various stakeholders. Maturity models have the following properties Klimko,,Weerdmeester et al.

The development of a single entity is simplified and described with a limited number of maturity levels usually four to six :. No levels can be skipped. Maturity models are basically application of life cycle approach.

The entity develops through the levels , until the highest level, which is the level of perfection. Maslow postulates that there are five levels in human needs. The human needs start with physiological needs and progresses to safety needs, needs of love and belonging, esteem needs and finally to self actualization needs.

CMMI supports both a staged representation and a continuous representation. In the staged representation the model has five levels. In this paper literature survey of fifteen KMM models has been carried out, identified their strengths and inadequacies, and a new model which combines the strengths and eliminates the inadequacies of the existing models is proposed.

These maturity models were identified based on literature survey through academic journals, web sites of various organizations and references used in some of the models. The fifteen models were selected based on the adequacy of the information provided in the published literature. The characteristics of the fifteen KMM models reviewed, along with their strengths and inadequacies are summarized in the table 1. In the table column 2 lists the model names followed by the authors.

The models are named with the name of the first author, wherever available. Column 3 lists the key areas identified in the model. Column 4 lists the number of levels of the models followed by the names of the levels.

Column 5 lists the characteristics of the maturity levels in progression from the lowest level to the highest level. Column 6 and 7 list the strengths and inadequacies identified by the authors. The inadequacy does not necessarily mean that the feature is not present in the model, but only indicates that the feature is not explicitly mentioned in the referred literature. Model Name. Key Areas. No of Levels. Characteristics of Levels. Default, Reactive, Aware, Convinced , Sharing. Organization-wide knowledge sharing systems with visible link between KM processes and results;.

Self-sustaining KM movement; Institutionalization of knowledge sharing culture. Detailed description of behavioral characteristics and identification of parameters at each level. No validation. Knowledge is not a KA. No classification of parameters at level 5.

Establishment of a KM strategy that is tightly linked to the business strategy;. Refining the KM processes into standard replicable methodologies ; Expansion of KM strategy through out the organization; Continuous improvement, Institutionalization and breakthrough innovation.

KM strategy that is linked to business strategy and driven by return on investment. Individual, departmental and organizational performance assessment aligned with the KM strategy. No Assessment methodology. KM enabling of normal workflow; Monitoring and measuring of knowledge sharing;. Knowledge sharing with other organizations and exploiting common ways of knowledge creation. Extended organizational maturity. No Key Areas.

Knowledge Chaotic,. Lack of visible relationship between KM and achievement of organizational goals; Implementation of KM pilot projects;. Organization-wide usage of KM tools and realization of business benefits of KM;. Adoption of KM procedures and tools as integral part of organizational and individual processes. Identification of characteristics in terms Key areas like people, process, technology and content.

Partially normative model since freedom is given to select the requirements to reach a maturity level. Maturity stage requirements are not in terms of Key Areas. Unplanned knowledge processes; Implementation of the first structure to ensure a higher process quality;. Systematic structure and definition of knowledge processes; Enhancement of the process management through tracking the performance measures; Establishment of structures for continuous improvement.

Excessive concentration on process, with very minimum concentration on people, technology and knowledge. Lack of formal processes for effective usage of organizational knowledge; realization of the potential in harnessing organizational knowledge for business benefits; knowledge enabled business processes and realization of its business impacts; matured collaboration and collective organizational intelligence; utilization of organizational knowledge for consistent and continuous process optimization and business advantage.

Integration of KM processes to business process and business benefits. An assessment model that includes a proposed solution. Capturing and delivering of knowledge in repeatable steps; Identification of executive block of knowledge that is critical to lead the organization as a cohesive unit;. Measurement of team understanding of executive knowledge;. Culture of knowledge creation; Continuous process development. No Key Area like people , technology and knowledge. No assessment methodology.

Usage of standardized productivity tools by knowledge workers; Creation of knowledge maps; Usage of data mining technology to retrieve relevant knowledge; Availability of Artificial Intelligence AI techniques for solving knowledge problems. Lack of concentration on people and process. It is not a software process model. It is a framework that is used to analyze the approach and techniques followed by any organization to develop software products.

It also provides guidelines to further enhance the maturity of the process used to develop those software products. It is based on profound feedback and development practices adopted by the most successful organizations worldwide. This model describes a strategy for software process improvement that should be followed by moving through 5 different levels.

Each level of maturity shows a process capability level. It only helps if it is put into place early in the software development process. It has no formal theoretical basis and in fact is based on the experience of very knowledgeable people. Communities of Practice Open Source Ethics KM Strategy Development Measurement, Analysis and KM Performance The Benefits Ethics edited by mds hotmail.

KM framework edited by mds hotmail. Terminology edited by mds hotmail. The Benefits edited by mds hotmail. KM Maturity Model How can an organization's knowledge mangement be assessed?

In Siemens AG KMMM, the 5 maturity levels are: Initial: - Knowledge management is a one-time process - There are no formal KM practices within the organization Repeatable: - The significance of KM is recognized - KM processes are implemented and tested Defined: - KM is supported by day-to-day activities - KM roles are created, defined, and filled Managed: - Basically, this stage includes everything in the "defined" stage, except that it is more standardized - Organization-wide KM practices are defined - The effectiveness of KM is measured regularly Optimized: - KM is perfected and mastered - Flexible to external and internal changes 2.

It is based on the belief that in any organzation, the goal of KM is to transform organizational knowledge into business benefits. In this model, each maturity level is defined based on how people, process, and technology interact with each other within the organization and are influenced by the corporate culture.

Initial: - No formal processes for effectively combining KM with business delivery Intent : - The potential of KM to help realize business benefits is acknowledged Initiative: - The organization has already intergrated KM with its business processes - The benefits and impacts of KM are observed Intelligent: - Collaboration and sharing in all business processes - Collective and collborative organizational intelligence Innovative: - Knowledge becomes the organization's own asset - The organization is able to use its knowledge to optimize its business processes and gain a competitive advantage 3.