| This study analyzes adoption and implementation of the Software Engineering Institute's Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) at Defense Engineering (pseudonym). The overarching finding is that the management assumptions underlying the CMMI have their roots in a particular tradition of management thinking belonging to the Industrial Age---Scientific Management or Taylorism; and, that a more enlightened CMMI management philosophy is needed for its successful implementation and practice by knowledge workers (engineers) in the Information Age.;How far can the CMMI model respond to modern challenges such as globalization and the networked society? Through the lens of modern management theory, problems with the CMMI stem from its management assumptions. This study demonstrates that these assumptions have their roots in Frederick Taylor's rational scientific management philosophy.;Using theories from Marx, Braverman, Weber, Taylor, Goffman, and Douglas uncovers the implicit assumptions and power relations cloaked by a rational bureaucratic management science veil of objectivity and value-neutrality. Tracing these assumptions and power relations to the real life worlds of a CMMI defense engineering contractor (Defense Engineering) reveal the potentially dehumanized subjectivity effects of the CMMI on engineers. These engineers are inscribed in a seamless and inescapable network of totalitarian power relations epitomized by authoritarian admonitions of "continuous process improvement" and "high maturity CMMI" objectives.;CMMI is heavily associated with command-and-control hierarchical management and power structures. The CMMI implies top-down management and separation of process improvement goals (thinking---management's domain) from process improvement practice (doing---engineers' domain). In addition, CMMI is distrustful of personal mastery, individualism, and heroism.;An implication of this case study is that engineering projects vary considerably and are carried out in diverse cultures and environments in an increasingly global world characterized by rapid technological development. Diversity of approaches, based on different management assumptions and cultural needs, should be recognized, encouraged, and practiced.;Another implication is that leaders of innovations in process improvement should start by considering the engineers' beliefs about engineering practices and values. Does this mean that CMMI is flawed? No, but it does mean that there should be a more humanistic application of the CMMI in which the means of process improvement are balanced with goals, objectives, and needs of its engineering and management practitioners. |
