Purpose. Score the organisation's current practice against a consistent model,
with evidence, and agree the target.
Assessment details
| Field | Detail |
|---|
| Organisation | |
| Date | |
| Facilitator | |
| Participants | |
| Scope | |
Levels
| Level | Name | Definition |
|---|
| 1 | Initial | Ad hoc, reactive; success depends on individual effort |
| 2 | Repeatable | Basic process exists but is not standardised or documented |
| 3 | Defined | Documented and standard across the organisation; some silos remain |
| 4 | Managed | Measured; cross-team collaboration effective; automation in use |
| 5 | Optimised | Automated, integrated, continuously improved |
Scoring rules
- Score the observed practice, not the documented intent.
- Score each dimension separately before averaging.
- Every score has at least one piece of evidence.
- Agree the score with the customer. A disputed score is a finding.
- Re-score on a fixed cadence.
Scorecard
| Dimension | Current | Evidence | Target | Gap | Owner |
|---|
| Process | | | | | |
| Tools and technology | | | | | |
| Team and collaboration | | | | | |
| Automation | | | | | |
| Governance and compliance | | | | | |
| Average | | | | | |
Dimension detail
Process
| Level | Indicator |
|---|
| 1 | No consistent process; each project invents one |
| 2 | Some process exists; teams differ |
| 3 | Documented SDLC, generally followed |
| 4 | Process is measured |
| 5 | Process changes based on evidence |
Evidence:
| Level | Indicator |
|---|
| 1 | Ad hoc, overlapping or unmaintained tooling |
| 2 | Tools exist but are inconsistently used |
| 3 | Standard toolchain adopted across teams |
| 4 | Toolchain integrated end to end |
| 5 | Toolchain evaluated and evolved on a cycle |
Evidence:
Team and collaboration
| Level | Indicator |
|---|
| 1 | Strict silos; handoffs are the delivery mechanism |
| 2 | Some cross-functional work |
| 3 | Cross-functional teams in places |
| 4 | Teams own services end to end |
| 5 | Information flows without escalation |
Evidence:
Automation
| Level | Indicator |
|---|
| 1 | Manual build, deploy and infrastructure |
| 2 | Scripted but not consistent |
| 3 | CI runs; deployment partly manual |
| 4 | Automated deployment with gates |
| 5 | Fully automated, gated, reversible; IaC and policy as code |
Evidence:
Governance and compliance
| Level | Indicator |
|---|
| 1 | Manual, retrospective controls; often bypassed |
| 2 | Controls documented but inconsistently applied |
| 3 | Controls applied at release |
| 4 | Controls partly automated |
| 5 | Policy as code; continuous evidence |
Evidence:
Summary
Overall maturity level:
Key strengths:
Principal gaps:
Action plan
| # | Action | Addresses | Owner | Due | Success measure |
|---|
| 1 | | | | | |
Next assessment
| Field | Detail |
|---|
| Date | |
| Participants | |
| Focus | |