TOP TOC 
Agile . since Jun 23 . Index . DOCs TOP TOC
On the negative side, many people have argued that CMM certification appears to be somewhat arbitrary. Organizations that certify in CMM make their money by showing that it has helped organizations move up the ladder to Level 5. Getting certification, at least at Levels 2 and 3, often seems to be more associated with good paperwork than with good management. It is, after all, very difficult for an outside organization to come in, and, in a very short time, determine whether an organization is doing what it says it's doing. Just look at the current accounting mess we're in with Enron, WorldCom, and others.
A second major concern is that CMM certification is largely about an organization's management processes (estimating, scheduling, control) and not nearly so much about the quality of the software products produced.9 There are even those who say that to become a Level 2 or 3 organization, a company doesn't necessarily need to have a good (or state-of-the-art) software process in place but only must blindly follow whatever process it has.
Other critics say that CMM certification is not so much of a quality certification, but a marketing one. As with ISO 9000, organizations seeking CMM certification bend over backward to produce reams upon reams of documentation that can then be reviewed by CMM inspectors. (In defense, we noted earlier that although many of the Indian software organizations came into CMM for marketing purposes, the process generally becomes ingrained and produces much better overall software management.)
No matter what your viewpoint, though, one thing is clear: CMM Level 3 or 4 ordinarily involves a very strong (heavy-handed) management style. By and large, more attention in these organizations is paid to project management than to actual production. This is a matter of concern for many software developers who would much rather design and program than fill out project management forms.
Agile . since Jun 23 . Index . DOCs TOP TOC
In the end, CMM depends upon comparing performance with management. Perhaps the best analogy is with sports. CMM proponents suggest that we compare a little league baseball team with a major league one, if you want to see the difference, let's say, between Levels 1 and 4. And, if you want to see the difference between a Level 4 and Level 5 organization, look at the New York Yankees against any other major league franchise. (Note that there is little discussion here about the skill of the individual players.)
All teams and all software organizations do the right things (such as plan, define, design, code, test, and install). The difference between the good ones and the bad ones is that the good ones do the right things in the right sequence more often. The great organizations keep looking at what they are doing and try to find ways to do it better. An organization at Level 5 keeps reinventing itself to incorporate new people, new technology, and new management strategies.