9.5

9.5 Maturity self-assessment

Every topic in Parts 1 through 8 ends with a five-level maturity model: 1 Initiate, 2 Develop, 3 Standardize, 4 Manage, 5 Orchestrate. This appendix consolidates them into one matrix for organizational self-assessment. Score each topic honestly, using concrete evidence, not aspiration. See topic 8.4 for the cross-cutting, five-dimension programme model this topic-by-topic matrix complements, and remember that programme maturity is the minimum across dimensions, not the average.

How to use this matrix

  1. For each topic, read its own maturity model (the topic is the authoritative source; this table is a summary index).
  2. Score your organization 1 through 5 against concrete evidence, not intention.
  3. Do not average across topics within a part; each topic measures a distinct capability.
  4. Feed low scores into topic 8.5’s adoption roadmap as investment priorities, not as a verdict to feel bad about (topic 1.1).

Part 1: Foundations of Measurement

TopicCapabilityYour score (1-5)
1.1Measuring to inform decisions, not to judge
1.2Guardrail-pairing discipline against Goodhart’s law
1.3Outcome-weighted, not output-weighted, metric sets
1.4Governance: ownership, charters, retirement discipline
1.5Instrumentation quality and data-source reliability
1.6Statistical literacy in interpreting metrics

Part 2: Flow Metrics

TopicCapabilityYour score (1-5)
2.1Flow Framework adoption, value stream mapped honestly
2.2Flow-item classification, consistent and intake-time
2.3Flow velocity and distribution, always paired
2.4Flow time and flow load, tracked against Little’s law
2.5Flow efficiency and WIP management
2.6Cycle-time decomposition and diagnosis
2.7Queueing theory applied to shared-resource utilization
2.8Lean value stream metrics, mapped and rolled up
2.9Pull request and review metrics, quality-guarded
2.10DORA framework adoption, paired and system-level

Part 3: Developer Experience and the SPACE Framework

TopicCapabilityYour score (1-5)
3.1Balanced, multi-dimension SPACE adoption
3.2Satisfaction and well-being measurement
3.3Multi-signal performance measurement
3.4Activity metrics used only in aggregate context
3.5Communication and knowledge-concentration tracking
3.6Focus-time protection and measurement
3.7Survey design rigor and DevEx measurement

Part 4: Code and Quality Metrics

TopicCapabilityYour score (1-5)
4.1Complexity metrics used for triage, not judgement
4.2Coverage paired with mutation testing
4.3Hotspot analysis driving refactoring priority
4.4Static analysis severity triage and trust
4.5Visible, quantified technical debt backlog
4.6Documentation usefulness and knowledge health

Part 5: Product and Business Metrics

TopicCapabilityYour score (1-5)
5.1Severity-weighted escaped defect tracking
5.2Adoption measured as trial plus retention
5.3Honest, chain-documented outcome claims
5.4Unit economics and cost attribution
5.5Defensible, range-based ROI discipline

Part 6: Reliability, Operations, and Security Metrics

TopicCapabilityYour score (1-5)
6.1Evidence-based SLOs and spendable error budgets
6.2Blameless, phase-decomposed incident metrics
6.3Sustainable, measured on-call and capacity
6.4Time-to-remediate security metrics, non-punitive

Part 7: Metrics in the Age of AI

TopicCapabilityYour score (1-5)
7.1AI-era metric-validity audit conducted
7.2Evidence-based AI-assisted development measurement
7.3Guardrails against metric inflation and quality dilution
7.4Outcome-telemetry-led metrics investment

Part 8: Building a Metrics Program

TopicCapabilityYour score (1-5)
8.1Audience-specific, honestly designed dashboards
8.2Deliberate, hybrid build-versus-buy tooling strategy
8.3Trust-building, fear-avoiding rollout practice
8.4Cross-cutting programme maturity self-assessment
8.5Phased, foundation-first adoption roadmap

Cross-cutting programme dimensions (topic 8.4)

DimensionYour score (1-5)
Governance and ownership
Instrumentation quality
Outcome-versus-output balance
Cultural trust
Continuous improvement

Overall programme maturity = the minimum of the five scores above, not the average.