A Conceptual Mixed Realities (AR/VR) Capability Maturity Model – With Special Emphasis on Implementation

  • Sonja Hammerschmid
  • Gerhard Kormann
  • Thomas Moser
  • Michael Reiner
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 748)

Abstract

This paper investigates the promoting and opposing factors which determine implementation paths (or process improvements) of mixed reality applications in industrial companies. Mixed realities are defined as the combined application of virtual and augmented reality technologies. We review maturity model-related literature to ascertain which reference models are available and how mixed reality phenomena have been treated. The Capability Maturity Model (CMM) is the starting point of our analysis. The authors aim at setting the foundation of a mixed reality readiness/maturity model that take into consideration the scientific relevance and the actual requirements of the practical application. The conceptual model incorporates the companies’ technological, organisational and industry value chain-related maturity-levels. To consider empirical implications, we applied a case study approach based on the real-life implementation projects in industrial companies.

Keywords

Mixed reality Maturity model CMM Automotive spice 

References

  1. CCMI Product Team: CMMI for Development Version 1.2. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh (2006)Google Scholar
  2. Herndon, M.A., Moore, R., Phillips, M., Walker, J., West, L.: Interpreting Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) for Service Organizations - A Systems Engineering and Integration Service Example. Carnegie Mellon University, Pennsilvania (2003)Google Scholar
  3. ISO/IEC 33020:2015. Information technology - Process assessment - Process measurment framework for assessment of process capability. ISO/IEC (2015)Google Scholar
  4. Paulk, M.C.: A history of the capability maturity model for software. ASQ Softw. Qual. Prof. 12(1), 5–19 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. Sassenburg, H., Kitson, D.: A Comparative Analysis of CMMI and Automotive SPICE. Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute – Europe, Frankfurt/Main, Germany (2006)Google Scholar
  6. VDA, QMC Working Group 13/Automotive SIG: Automotive SPICE Process Reference Model/Process Assessment Model. VDA Quality Management Center, Germany (2015)Google Scholar
  7. Yin, R.K.: Case Study Research: Design and Method. Sage, London (2014)Google Scholar
  8. Yoon, B., Lee, K., Yoon, J.: Development of an R&D process model for enhancing the quality of R&D: comparison with CMMI, ISO and EIRMA. Total Qual. Manage. Bus. Excellence 26(7–8), 746–761 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sonja Hammerschmid
    • 1
  • Gerhard Kormann
    • 1
  • Thomas Moser
    • 2
  • Michael Reiner
    • 1
  1. 1.IMC University of Applied SciencesKremsAustria
  2. 2.University of Applied Sciences St. PöltenSt. PöltenAustria

Personalised recommendations