Back in February, I was involved in the creation of rallying cry for the adoption of agile techniques in project management. We called this the Declaration of Interdependence - six statement which we felt differentiated the agile approach from traditional teaching in project management. You can read my personal interpretation of each statement here: [1]; [2]; [3]; [4]; [5]; [6]. Shortly after publication I was challenged (via my Yahoo! group) to state how the DOI differed from existing project management frameworks such as the CMMI IPPD from the Software Engineering Institute. My initial reaction was to state that as the CMMI was a framework which didn't prescribe specific practices it was likely to be compatible and despite frameworks like the CMMI, it was still possible that many project managers were practicing techniques which were damaging. I promised to do an analysis and post it here when it was done.

After 9 months of being deeply immersed in the CMMI whilst producing MSF for CMMI Process Improvement, including two visits to the SEI at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, PA, I'm finally ready to make good on the promise - a gap analysis of the DOI against the CMMI.

[DOI] We increase return on investment by making continuous flow of value our focus.
[CMMI] The CMMI is pretty agnostic on this. It's a "so what?". It doesn't break the CMMI nor does the CMMI ask us to do anything differently. Although the CMMI is written in a project-centric fashion, it does not rule out small increments of delivery.
#1 is compatible!

[DOI] We deliver reliable results by engaging customers in frequent interactions and shared ownership.
[CMMI] The CMMI actively encourages stakeholder involvement and has explicit activities for monitoring it.
#2 is compatible!

[DOI] We expect uncertainty and manage for it through iterations, anticipation, and adaptation.
[CMMI] The CMMI is founded on the principles of W. Edwards Deming, his Theory of Profound Knowledge, the theory of variation and the concepts of special and common cause variation. Although some explicit text talks about "plan the plan, plan the work, work the plan" and has very "conformance to plan" language in some of the practice guidance, there is nothing about uncertainty, variation, adaptive planning, iterations and anticipation that is incompatible with CMMI. In fact the new MSF for CMMI Process Improvement does these things explicitly.
#3 is compatible!

[DOI] We unleash creativity and innovation by recognizing that individuals are the ultimate source of value, and creating an environment where they can make a difference.
[CMMI} The CMMI is very big on the idea of creating an organizational environment for success (where success is defined as achieving continuous improvement - in a quality assurance sense). There are explicit process areas around training and organizational environment. There is nothing in the CMMI which is incompatible with the DOI's embrace of innovation and creativity and its underlying principle that people are assets rather than fungible cost centers.
#4 is compatible!

[DOI] We boost performance through group accountability for results and shared responsibility for team effectiveness.
[CMMI] Though many formal organizations which follow the CMMI use RACI designations and have individual accountability, the CMMI is really agnostic to this. What it asks for is that the agreement is written down in a Team Charter. Again, with MSF for CMMI Process Improvement I have designed it to exhibit group accountability and shared responsibility style with the team of peers concept carried over from earlier versions of MSF. This is perfectly compatible with CMMI.
#5 is compatible!

[DOI] We improve effectiveness and reliability through situationally specific strategies, processes and practices.
[CMMI] The CMMI explicitly expects situationally specific practices and processes and encourages it with explicit activities aimed at tailoring processes and practices for specific projects.
#6 is compatible!

Asking the question the other way, "Is there anything in the CMMI which is incompatible with the DOI?" is also an interesting question. There are 25 process areas in the CMMI. However, my take on it is "No! There is nothing at the process area and goal level which is incompatible with the DOI." The problems arise at the interpretation of the specific practices. The DOI was born out of observation that project management practices as taught in so many places are leading to undesirable behavior and unfavorable results. The DOI seeks to reset the mind set (or paradigm) of how people think about projects so that they adopt the correct behavior that leads to good results.

It's perfectly possible to be an agile project manager and be running a CMMI compliant process.