- Is a holder's CBAP less valuable if the holder's experience was gained at a CMM level 1 company; at only 1 company? #IIBA [10/23/09 via Tweetdeck]
Not being an expert tweeter, I don't know how to carry on a conversation using twitter, so I started this blog.
First I think it unlikely individuals will know the CMM level of their company. But given 5 levels, you are operating in a difficult environment (if the environment is level 1) and not as productively as possible. The CMM level is not under the control, in the short run, of the individual practitioner.
So to GreySkinnedBoy: If I thought I was at a level 4 or 5 company, I might want to find a way to get my resume to talk about all the great things I had learned, maybe brought about, and could transfer to a new company.
Part of the motivation for my thought pattern is the BA Benchmark recently published by IAG consulting. They maintained that a beginning BA at a level 4 company would be more productive then an experienced BA at a level 1 company. productivity is measured by: on time, on budget, with a validated solution. So I differ with ClearSpringBA.
Also, GSB, knowledge and application are not the same thing; it's the latter that employers pay for.
While I would love to pass a knowledge only CBAP, CBAP is stronger for the experience requirement, especially the requirement to cover 4 of 6 knowledge areas. But I think it could be further strengthened, by finding a way to strengthen the Organization Process Assets that lead to higher CMM, ie centers of excellence. I'd argue to add this as a knowledge area for future BABOK's.
Now it's your turn......
Posts
Past productivity is no guarantee of future performance.
ReplyDeleteMy response (made over two tweets) was to separate the two issues of being accredited as a CBAP from where we may have worked.
"#CBAP gained at CMM 1 company is not devalued, as it speaks of their knowledge and how to apply it -- however experience gained at CMM level 1 company does not have same value -- should we put #CMMI levels on resumes?"
As you responded: knowledge and application are indeed different, having the former implies you know what to do while the latter implies that you also know how and when to apply it.
Thankfully, like any competently designed exam, the CBAP sets questions on a number of levels - not just knowledge of the tasks and techniques in the BABOK. These levels are best described by Bloom’s taxonomy, where knowledge is but the first step, followed by comprehension, application, analysis, evaluation, and creation (the last two were originally cast as synthesis and evaluation).
On this basis, someone who is a Certified BA Professional has proven they have the knowledge and how to apply it.
While we may not understand that minutiae of the CMMI level definitions - most of us will know if we have to keep reinventing the wheel on every project and there always seem to be obstacles in our way versus if we’re working with a slick well-oiled machine that supports change and improvement activities.
The BA benchmark report makes a strong case that a beginner in a high-performing (CMM#4) environment could be more productive than someone experienced working in a low-performing (CMM#1) one.
Clearly being productive and having more successful projects makes for a much better resume and interview, so experience gained in a CMM#1 environment could appear less valuable than at CMM#4. This boils down to the individual’s ability to write and cast their achievements in the best possible light, to have completed a project at all might have been a great achievement.
On that basis, ClearSpringBA is right, someone gaining the CBAP in a CMM#1 environment has overcome greater odds – and could potentially be more capable in any environment.
And remember, that past productivity is no guarantee of future performance – a mediocre BA moving from a CMM#4 environment to CMM#1 will then start to fail more obviously. A strong BA supported by sound knowledge, skills, and aptitude will outperform their peers in any environment – and the CBAP is one indicator of this.
David, Thanks for your comments.
ReplyDeleteTests, especially multiple choice tests, are notorious in their failure to measure the upper levels of Blooms Taxonomy. How successful CBAP is in this area - I do not know. However I'd argue that the existence of an experience requirement can be interpreted as a sign that the test itself does not measure the expertise, 'wisdom' gained from experience. If this were not so, the CBAP by itself could spit out a test score like: you are a CBAP with 4.9 years of equivalent experience.
Yes, a CBAP with 4.9 years of experience would be a failing score!
ReplyDeleteResponding to ClearSpringBA at her blog
ReplyDeleteI think my motivation in the original tweet was to foster interest in CMMI in the BA community - improve the BA process not of the individual BA, but of the organization they belong to. Not doing so increases the likelihood of failure no matter how good the BA. Having projects fail with CBAP holders is not healthy for the profession.
There are 2 important external inputs to BABOK knowledge areas - Enterprise Architecture (3 KA's) and Organizational Process Assets (5 KA's). These then are obvious candidates for future extensions and in the case of the latter one which we should seek to effect sooner than later.
ClearSpringBA blog is at:
http://www.bridging-the-gap.com