What does the blunt/brute-force/silo/stove-pipe approach look like?
In a nutshell, the traits of that approach are: Process Area description documents are prescriptive and implementation of the processes do not easily account for the inter-relatedness of the process areas to one another, or of the generic practices to the specific practices. Furthermore, the processes seem to be implemented out-of-step with actual development/project work. Nowhere in the descriptions or artifacts of the processes is it clear how and when the process gets done. It’s not a matter of poorly written processes, quite the opposite, many of these processes are the exemplar of process documents. What these processes lack is a connection to the development work as it happens. Without a process subject-matter expert on hand, it’s unlikely that the process would actually get done. In many cases (thanks to the sheer size of the organization) such processes *are*, in fact, done by a process specialist, and not by project personnel. In other words, with such processes, if an organiz