Quality Model Mania

Computerworld - Shocked and awed by the industrial might of Japan in the 1980s, U.S. companies got religion—the quality religion. They rushed to improve their business processes by adopting a host of quality frameworks, like ISO 9000 for the enterprise, Six Sigma for the plant and the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) for software engineering.
Today, IT managers have a bewildering array of quality disciplines to choose from. Some, such as Six Sigma, ISO 9000 and the Malcolm Baldrige program, may be dictated to you by your CEO. Others, such as Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology (CobiT), may be imposed by your auditors. And IT-focused disciplines may originate in your own shop, such as CMM for software development and the Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) for IT operations and services.
While there is some overlap among these quality frameworks, in most cases, they don't conflict. Indeed, most large companies use two or three of them. For example, IBM uses ISO 9000, CMM, ITIL, Six Sigma and several homegrown quality programs.
Meanwhile, other equally sophisticated companies don't use any of them, preferring to roll their own. For instance, MasterCard International Inc. has adapted parts of a number of programs to its own way of doing business. It underwent an external assessment for CMM a year ago and implemented some ideas from that, but it hasn't adopted the framework formally.
"We have a hybrid of quality programs," says Sheryl Andrasko, vice president for systems development at MasterCard. The program has reduced the development time for new software releases from 18 months to 12 and has reduced the number of software defects as well, she says.
Other companies, such as Nortel Networks Ltd., say the choice should be driven by customers and partners. Nortel uses a telecommunications-oriented version of ISO 9000 because that's what its customers use.

Credit: Maria Rendon