CHAPTER 3
Process Maturity
It is important for corporations to monitor and assess organizational process maturity. This helps a corporation identify potential areas of improvement and highlights business-critical functions that, if not at an appropriate maturity level, may put a business at risk. However, many organizations become confused with the plethora of standards by which to assess the maturity of their business processes. As a result, they are unable to properly assess the risk that immature processes pose to enterprise initiatives. They are also unable to identify the causes of weaknesses in their operating environments that, if addressed, could reduce cost and increase operating efficiencies. This chapter outlines the components that make up the Process Maturity Model (PMM) and describes the various levels of process maturity at which an organization may be operating. It provides a concrete model for evaluating and assessing the maturity of processes and related improvement efforts within a department or an organization and identifies several common signs of process immaturity. This chapter is organized around the following topics:
• Process Maturity Model defined: What is the Process Maturity Model and what is it used for?
• Process Maturity levels: What are the various process maturity levels? What are the differences between each level of process maturity?
• Assessing Process Maturity: When is an organization ready to assess its maturity? How is process maturity typically assessed?
Process Maturity Model Defined
The Process Maturity Model (PMM) is a set of structured levels that describe how well the behaviors, practices, and processes of an organization can reliably and sustainably produce required outcomes. The model is based on the process maturity framework first described by Watts Humphrey in his 1989 book Managing the Software Process and later enhanced and popularized by Carnegie Mellon University. It describes an evolutionary improvement path that guides organizations as they move from immature, inconsistent business activities to mature, disciplined processes. The model orders these stages so that improvements at each level provide a foundation on which to build improvements undertaken at the next level. The basic concept underlying process maturity is that mature organizations do things systematically, while immature organizations achieve their outcomes as a result of heroic efforts put forth by individuals using tactics that they create spontaneously. Ultimately, Process Maturity is an indication of how close an organization’s processes are to being complete and capable of continual improvement through qualitative measures and feedback. Thus, for a process to be mature, it has to be complete, useful, known by all participants and stakeholders, automated where applicable, reliable in information, and continuously improved. The Process Maturity Model also assists organizations in
• Deploying Process Improvement frameworks: The Process Maturity Model is used to guide improvement departments, programs, and initiatives.
• Evaluating organizational capability: The Process Maturity Model provides a standard against which to evaluate the capability of processes in meeting service levels, quality, cost, and functionality commitments.
• Conducting organizational benchmarking: The Process Maturity Model allows organizations to evaluate their standing relative to the maturity of business processes within organizations across their industry segment.
• Identifying appropriate areas for improvement: The Process Maturity Model is used to determine where weaknesses may exist in departments and/or processes and enables organizations to adequately assign recourses to improve said areas.
• Selecting high-priority improvement actions: The Process Maturity Model allows organizations to prioritize organizational process enhancements based on a structured and proven road map.
Process Maturity Levels
The Process Maturity Model contains five levels that are used to describe the state of process maturity within an organization (Figure 3-1). Within the model, maturity is measured on an ordinal scale, and each level is used for benchmarking and evaluation and describes the key stages needed in order to achieve a fully effective Process-Oriented environment. The five levels of the Process Maturity Model are described as follows:
FIGURE 3-1 Process Maturity Levels
• Level 1—Informal: Processes at this level are usually undocumented and in a state of dynamic change, tending to be driven in an ad hoc uncontrolled or reactive manner by operators or business events. This provides a chaotic or an unstable environment for processes where emphasis is often on doing whatever it takes to get things done. At this level, Process Improvement practices are performed inconsistently in pockets across the organization, and processes are often successful because of heroic efforts carried out by process operators.
• Level 2—Documented: At this level, some processes within an organization are documented, possibly with repeatable and consistent results. Process discipline is unlikely to be rigorous. However, where it exists, it may help to ensure that existing processes are maintained during times of stress. At this stage, best practices are starting to emerge and some basic measurements are drawn. Implementing a corporate culture that supports the methods, practices, and procedures of Process Improvement has also started at this level.
• Level 3—Integrated: At this level, there are sets of defined and documented standard processes established and subject to some degree of improvement over time. These standard processes are firmly in place (i.e., they are the current processes of the organization) and are used to establish consistency of process performance across the enterprise. Process Management and Improvement practices are beginning to be integrated across the organization and include those that enable the successful management of significant, high-risk, complex projects.
• Level 4—Managed: At this level, process metrics are established and used to effectively control As-Is processes. Organizations are able to identify ways to adjust and adapt processes without measurable losses of quality or deviations from specifications. Processes are managed with some cross-functional integration and show greater consistency of actions and better communication between functions. At this level, Process Improvement has been elevated to a strategic management practice. Cultural and organizational behaviors, structures, and tools are in place to ensure Process Improvement projects are strategically aligned.
• Level 5—Optimized: At this level, the focus is on continually improving process performance through both incremental and innovative business and technological changes/improvements using established metrics and controls. At maturity level 5, processes are cross functionally integrated and concerned with addressing statistical common causes of process variation and changing the process to improve process performance. The goals set for processes are being analyzed for achievements and improved regularly using Process Improvement techniques such as Six Sigma and Kaizan. The Process Ecosystem is being improved and efforts are underway to error-proof processes using techniques such as Poka-Yoke.
NOTE Poka-Yoke is a Japanese term that means mistake proofing. It is considered as any mechanism inserted into a process that helps a process operator avoid mistakes when executing a process activity or series of activities. Its purpose is to eliminate defects by preventing, correcting, or drawing attention to human errors. The concept was formalized as part of the Toyota Production System management and improvement philosophy.
Several characteristics of each process maturity level are outlined below.
• Maturity Level 1
Performing only core duties Working extended hours to complete day-to-day activities
• Maturity Level 2
Defining a Standard Process
Performing the Defined Process
• Maturity Level 3
Planning performance
Ensuring disciplined performance
Verifying performance
Tracking performance
Training employees
Utilizing Process Improvement and Project Management
• Maturity Level 4
Establishing measurable quality goals
Managing performance objectively
Preventing defects
Performing change management
• Maturity Level 5
Improving organizational capability
Improving process effectiveness
Preventing defects
Assessing Process Maturity
Process Maturity Assessments are a diagnostic tool used to appraise and characterize an organization’s processes. This includes all business activities and supporting tasks, tools, methods, practices, and standards involved in the development and improvement of a process throughout the Process Improvement life cycle. It has become widely accepted that the quality of an organization’s products and services is largely dictated by the quality of the processes used to develop and maintain them. As a result, formal Process Maturity Assessments are used to identify the strengths and weaknesses of an organization’s processes, highlight organizational risks, and determine capability and maturity level ratings. These assessments assist with
• Measuring the ability of the organization’s collective staff to repeatedly deliver outcomes that meet specifications on time and within budget or other specifications
• Identifying gaps in current operational or Process Improvement capabilities
• Providing a foundation for improvement and guidance for advancement through prioritized, structured, and sequential improvements
• Providing an indicator of how effective the client’s organization is in meeting its goals in managing projects and meeting business objectives
NOTE The scope of a Process Maturity appraisal can be any portion of an organization, such as the entire company, a specific business unit, a specific geographic region, or a specific project.
An organization is ready to conduct a process maturity assessment when it becomes dissatisfied with any aspect of its current performance. Although the desire to improve is a natural first step, an organization must also be willing to demonstrate support for the assessment at the leadership level, and there must be a strong organizational commitment to any subsequent improvements or transformation efforts. Organizational resources and process operators must also be committed to not only conducting the assessment but also to supporting the improvement plans that follow. Assessments should not be undertaken until the affected organization has been informed and prepared for the assessment, necessary communications have been sent, and the need to measure improvement or to reassess at periodic intervals is supported by both process owners and organizational leaders.
Common signs that an organization is ready for formal assessment include
• Roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined within the organization.
• Employees do not understand the order in which work should be accomplished.
• Documentation about how to perform activities is not readily available.
• A process-oriented culture does not exist.
• Processes are not executed properly, resulting in errors, rework, mistakes, or scrap.
• Management assigns resources to fix problems, but the problems are never fully solved.
• Employees are often frustrated while working, and morale is low.
• Customers (either internal or external) are continually unhappy with performance or results.
• Processes are disjointed across several departments, and finger-pointing and blaming exist when errors occur or performance worsens.
• Processes are not controlled or measured.
• A Customer-driven culture does not exist.
• Processes and activities contain too many reviews and sign-offs.
• Complexity, exceptions, and special cases are common.
• Established procedures are circumvented to expedite work.
• No one owns or manages processes.
• Teams spend a great deal of time rectifying issues.
• There are inconsistent procedures for identical tasks within the organization.
Overall, Process Maturity Assessments are an effective strategy for making Process Improvement a priority within an organization. They provide organizations with the information necessary to understand their position as a process-oriented enterprise, help build a clear picture of performance capability, and provide a comparison to competitors. They also provide answers to such questions as
• What are our company’s strengths and weaknesses?
• How can our Process Improvement practices enable us to achieve even greater profit/shareholder value while meeting our strategic goals and objectives?
• What areas do we need to improve so that we can immediately increase profitability?
• Do we need to modify our existing processes or practices, add new tools and technologies, or provide additional training for our staff?
• What is the overall morale or engagement of our organization? How can we better motivate, coach, and lead employees?
NOTE Although similar, Assessments and Evaluations are two distinct methods for determining Process Maturity. The primary difference between a maturity assessment and a maturity evaluation is that an assessment is an appraisal that an organization does to and for its own operations, whereas an evaluation is an appraisal conducted by an external group that comes in and looks at an organization’s process capability to help the organization make a decision regarding its future. After an assessment, the assessed organization’s leadership owns the assessment findings and results and typically uses the results to formulate an action plan for improvement. After an evaluation, the sponsoring organization’s leadership owns the evaluation results, but uses the results and recommendations of the external firm to make decisions regarding process structure, performance, risk, and improvement. In many cases, the external firm also drafts and proposes an action plan for the receiving organization. Assessment results are usually communicated across the organization, whereas the results of an Evaluation may or may not be shared with the evaluated organization.
Approach
Effective maturity assessments gather multiple, overlapping forms of evidence to evaluate the performance of an organization’s processes and activities, including
• Artifacts that are produced by performing a process
• Artifacts that support operating or performing a process
• Interviews with individuals or departments that operate processes
• Interviews with individuals who own or oversee a process and its performance
• Interviews with individuals who support a process
• Data used to exemplify the current state of organizational culture and/or the attitudes and behaviors found within it
• Data used to describe the performance of a process, its outcomes, and business results
Ultimately, Process Maturity Assessments are multidimensional and include the administration of surveys, document reviews, and a series of individual and small group interviews where results and subsequent recommendations are documented and summarized into reports. The following sections outline the typical assessment process.
Assessment Team
An assessment team is usually comprised of two assessors: one senior professional who serves as team lead and one mid-level professional who serves as an assessment team member. The lead assessor can be internal to the organization or an outside consultant as long as the individual is experienced in conducting assessments and is thoroughly grounded in the Process Maturity Model. An external assessor is likely to have the advantage of more assessment experience and the kind of perspective that arises from having conducted assessments across a broad spectrum of organizations. Assessment team members should be completely independent of the organization, processes, or projects under review in order to minimize the chance of positive bias, which often occurs when internal assessors are used. Experience performing various assessments has proven that it is critical that assessments be led by qualified and well-trained individuals in order to achieve accurate results in a reasonable amount of time and achieve a successful organizational intervention. By having well-trained and qualified assessors, different assessors should get similar results in organizations of similar maturity.
NOTE To ensure that Process Maturity Assessments have a successful impact, many factors need to be carefully considered. Foremost, the person who leads the assessment team must be well qualified and trained in assessment techniques and Process Improvement frameworks, methods, and concepts. In addition, members of the assessment team must also meet certain criteria such as having industry or organization knowledge. Furthermore, the selection of assessment participants must adequately cover the scope of the assessed organization.
Assessment Planning
Assessment planning begins with identification of the goals to be addressed by the assessment. These goals should be clearly communicated to the organization at the outset of the maturity assessment. Preparation also involves selecting the various processes and teams to be analyzed, planning and scheduling assessment activities, customizing survey questions, and scheduling and preparing for the kickoff meeting, which is held with all assessment participants. An important objective of this meeting is to prepare the assessment participants for what will occur throughout the assessment period and answer any questions they may have.
Survey Administration
Survey administration involves the completion of assessment surveys by the process owner, key process operators, and selected subject matter experts for each department and process involved in the assessment. The purpose of the survey is to gather written information that is used to determine whether a particular organization is or is not performing at a desired level. An assessment team is then able to summarize the results for a quick overview of the organization’s strengths and weaknesses. It is recommended that survey distribution be limited to those involved, impacted, or related to the processes in question, as the process-oriented language used in the survey may not be understood by all individuals across the organization.
Interview Sessions
Individual interviews are conducted with leaders across the organization, Process Improvement Organization members, process owners and operators, and other key stakeholders to validate survey responses. Group input can be obtained during the interview process in one-on-one meetings or focus groups to gain additional insight into the organization’s process performance and Process Improvement practices. Interviews serve to validate survey responses by determining the participant’s understanding of the processes being evaluated and the accuracy of responses provided by the various survey participants.
Artifact Reviews
Process artifact inspections and Process Improvement project deliverable reviews are completed to further validate survey responses and interview results. Document reviews help establish context and reveal areas that the assessment team needs to probe. A review of the documents also helps the assessment team evaluate and understand the processes that an organization uses in order to rate their strengths and weaknesses relative to the Process Maturity Model. Artifact reviews should include process documents such as policies, process maps and procedures, project-level documents such as project charters and schedules, as well as performance documents such as dashboards and reports.
Maturity Rating
The assessment team must assign an organizational maturity rating based on the results from the assessment surveys, interviews, and focus groups, as well as artifact inspections. Ratings by the assessment team depend on the quality of the data available to them, their ability to reliably judge the implementation and institutionalization of the process improvement practices in the organization, and their ability to correlate these practices with the Process Maturity Model.
Validation and Prioritization
Based on the assessment findings and overall maturity rating, the team develops a set of recommendations that can be presented to and used by the organization in question. It is important for assessment participants to validate and prioritize the team’s findings prior to finalization of the assessment deliverables. The employees who participated in the assessment should set time aside to validate findings and prioritize recommendations. This review technique helps the assessment team focus the final recommendations on those offering the greatest improvement impact for the organization.
Assessment Report Preparation and Delivery
The assessment team analyzes their findings based on all feedback and prepares the final assessment report. The improvement recommendations contained within the report should be presented informally to management prior to communication with any other group. This allows management the opportunity to not only understand the recommendations but to commit to implementing them in a timely manner. The recommendations are then presented formally in a findings presentation to the project team, key stakeholders, and all assessment participants. Assessment deliverables should be published and distributed to stakeholders immediately after the findings presentation. Deliverables typically include the findings and recommendations report, the survey results report, and an executive presentation.
Timeline
The amount of time required to conduct a formal Process Maturity assessment depends on the organization’s size, complexity, and culture. However, most assessments are typically completed within four weeks. A common structure and timeline for conducting assessments is outlined below.
Planning—Duration, 1 Week. During the first week, the assessment team is formed and the organization in question is educated. Time is also spent customizing the assessment approach for organization-specific requirements and preparing the organization for the assessment launch. Activities include preparing an assessment plan, scheduling workshops and interviews, and completing survey and interview questions. A kickoff meeting is conducted at the conclusion of week 1 to formally launch the maturity assessment process. Other key activities that are part of the planning phase include
• Verifying the organization’s or sponsor’s business goals for the assessment
• Determining organizational scope (the areas of the organization that will be assessed and any selected projects and assessment participants)
• Building a schedule for assessment activities and identifying the resources that will be used to perform these activities
• Mapping the assessment outputs and any anticipated follow-on activities
• Tailoring the assessment method for the organization in question
• Outlining any risks or constraints associated with executing the assessment
• Obtaining sponsor endorsement of the plan and authorization for the assessment to be conducted
Interviews and Surveys—Duration, 2 Weeks. During weeks 2 and 3, the assessment team completes the surveys and interviews with various members of the organization. The assessment team begins to review survey responses and prepares and conducts interviews with various process owners and operators. The assessment team also conducts interviews with management and small groups of practitioners. Facilitated focus groups and lessons-learned sessions are conducted; the assessment team also reviews various project deliverables to corroborate findings and gather as much information about the organization as possible. Confidentiality of all participants and data sources is critical to maintaining stability and credibility.
Recommendations and Improvements—Duration, 1 Week. The assessment team collaborates and discusses the various findings from survey responses, interviews, and artifact reviews. The team then drafts findings in terms of strengths and recommendations to advance process maturity. A maturity rating is also assigned at this stage, and results are often validated and prioritized by those who participated in the assessment. Last, the assessment team prepares and delivers an assessment report that outlines the current state of organizational practices, proposes recommendations for improvement, and provides the organization’s overall maturity ranking.
Results
A Process Maturity Assessment could reveal significant deficiencies or areas of improvement for an organization. As a result, a disciplined plan should be in place to build on the momentum of the assessment and to follow up on its findings and recommendations. This is achieved by putting in place a rigorous plan for implementing necessary changes. As time passes, the assessment’s momentum and power to motivate change diminishes. Postassessment process improvements need to be driven by senior management in order to achieve success. The key to successfully implementing assessment recommendations is to develop an actionable post assessment improvement plan. The plan should include several key components such as Process Improvement goals and objectives, project activities and schedules, team roles and responsibilities, and any risks or constraints. The organization’s leadership team must take responsibility for leading the effort, vest real authority in those who are responsible for implementing the improvements, and keep stakeholders informed of the progress of the implementation process.
Chapter Summary
Chapter 3 presented the standard for assessing the capabilities of organizations that develop process-intensive systems. It also outlined a framework that process-focused organizations can use to better assess and improve organizational process maturity. It outlined the various levels of maturity and described several signs of process immaturity. From this chapter, we also learned that
• The Process Maturity Model contains a series of stages based on other well-known maturity models, such as the Software Engineering Institute’s Capability Maturity Model.
• Each level describes how well the behaviors, practices, and processes of an organization can reliably and sustainably produce required outcomes.
• The Process Maturity Model can assist organizations deploy Process Improvement frameworks, evaluate organizational capability, conduct organizational benchmarking, identify appropriate areas for improvement, and elect high-priority improvement actions.
• The five levels of the Process Maturity Model are
Level 1, Informal
Level 2, Documented
Level 3, Integrated
Level 4, Managed
Level 5, Optimized
• Process Maturity Assessments are a diagnostic tool used to appraise and characterize an organization’s processes.
• The scope of a Process Maturity appraisal can be any portion of an organization, such as the entire company, a specific business unit, a specific geographic region, or a specific project.
• An organization is ready to conduct a process maturity assessment when it becomes dissatisfied with any aspect of its current performance.
• Postassessment process improvements need to be driven by leadership in order to achieve success, and the key to successfully implementing assessment recommendations is to develop an actionable postassessment improvement plan.
• The primary difference between an evaluation and an assessment is that an evaluation is an appraisal where an external group comes in and looks at an organization’s process capability to help make a decision regarding future business dealings, whereas an assessment is an appraisal that an organization performs to and for its own operations.
• The amount of time required to conduct a formal Process Maturity Assessment varies depending on the organization’s size, complexity, and culture.
Chapter Preview
Now that the components of Process Maturity have been discussed, the next step is to learn the mechanics of Process Architecture, its benefits, and the tasks typically involved with planning and controlling all aspects of process creation, improvement, and retirement within an organization. Chapter 4 provides an introduction to the concept of a Process Ecosystem and illustrates how process architecture can help guide organizations toward higher process maturity.
