1. Forrester
1.1. IT Governance Maturity Model
1.2. Information Security Maturity Model
2. Berenschot
2.1. Project Excellence Model® (PEM)
2.1.1. Date: 2003
2.1.2. Derived from EFQM / INK model
2.1.2.1. EFQM / INK model is suitable for traditional organizations but not for project organizations.
2.1.2.2. Berenschot adapted the EFQM / INK model to a model that is appropriate for project organizations.
2.1.3. PEM consists of 12 key areas that are divided over:
2.1.3.1. organization area
2.1.3.1.1. consist of critical success factors (CSFs) in the project organization
2.1.3.2. results area
2.1.3.2.1. consist of project success criteria
2.1.4. PEM consists of 2 types of result areas:
2.1.4.1. narrow (easy tangible and measurable elements)
2.1.4.1.1. ‘classic’ areas like time, costs and quality
2.1.4.2. broad (contain elements that can not be translated so easily in measurable terms)
2.1.4.2.1. client
2.1.4.2.2. project personnel
2.1.4.2.3. contracting partners
2.1.4.2.4. users
2.1.4.2.5. stakeholders
3. AXELOS
3.1. Relationships between P2MM, P1M3, P2M3, P3M3.
3.2. PRINCE2® Maturity Model (P2MM)
3.2.1. PRINCE2® Maturity Model (P2MM)
3.2.1.1. http://www.p3m3-officialsite.com/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.aspx?lID=462&sID=210
3.2.2. PRINCE2® Maturity Model (P2MM) Self-Assessment
3.2.2.1. http://www.p3m3-officialsite.com/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.aspx?lID=469&sID=210
3.2.3. Derived from P3M3®
3.2.4. Dedicated to PRINCE2®
3.3. Project Management Maturity Model (P1M3)
3.3.1. Since P2MM is focused specifically on the PRINCE2 project management method and therefore this model is only applicable to organizations that use the PRINCE2 method. In order to overcome this problem the Project Management Maturity Model (P1M3) is developed which is an abstraction of P2MM.
3.3.2. Abstraction of P2MM. P1M3 is, unlike P2MM, method independent and can be applied in any organization and is not only restricted to organizations where PRINCE2 is used as is the case with P2MM.
3.3.3. P1M3 is restricted to project management.
3.4. Project and Programme Management Maturity Model (P2M3)
3.4.1. P2M3 is an extension of P1M3.
3.4.2. Supports project and programme management.
3.5. Portfolio, Programme, Project Management Maturity Model (P3M3®)
3.5.1. P3M3 is an extension of P2M3 and P2MM.
3.5.2. v1 was published in 2006.
3.5.3. v2 was published in 2008.
3.5.4. Official website
3.5.4.1. http://www.p3m3-officialsite.com/
3.5.5. P3M3® Introduction and Guide
3.5.5.1. http://www.p3m3-officialsite.com/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.aspx?lID=456&sID=235
3.5.6. Viewed independently for:
3.5.6.1. Portfolio (PfM3)
3.5.6.1.1. http://www.p3m3-officialsite.com/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.aspx?lID=457&sID=210
3.5.6.1.2. P3M3® Portfolio Management Self-Assessment
3.5.6.2. Programme (PgM3)
3.5.6.2.1. http://www.p3m3-officialsite.com/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.aspx?lID=464&sID=210
3.5.6.2.2. P3M3® Programme Management Self-Assessment
3.5.6.3. Project (PjM3)
3.5.6.3.1. http://www.p3m3-officialsite.com/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.aspx?lID=458&sID=210
3.5.6.3.2. P3M3® Project Management Self-Assessment
3.5.7. 5 Levels of maturity
3.5.7.1. Level 1 - Awareness of process
3.5.7.2. Level 2 - Repeatable process
3.5.7.3. Level 3 - Defined process
3.5.7.4. Level 4 - Managed process
3.5.7.5. Level 5 - Optimised process
3.5.8. 7 Perspectives
3.5.8.1. Management Control
3.5.8.2. Benefits Management
3.5.8.3. Finance Management
3.5.8.4. Risk Management
3.5.8.5. Organisation Improvement
3.5.8.6. Organisation Governance
3.5.8.7. Resources
3.5.8.8. Each perspective describes the processes and practices that should be deployed at each level of maturity
3.5.8.9. Perspectivs group together a range of key characteristics
3.5.9. 5 Common attributes
3.5.9.1. Planning effectively
3.5.9.2. Stakeholder involvement
3.5.9.3. Information & Configuration Management
3.5.9.4. Quality
3.5.9.5. Capability building
3.5.9.6. Common attributes are themes that are common in each perspective and can be found at each level
3.5.10. Watch: P3M3® Self Assessment Tool
3.6. Management of Value (MoV®) Maturity Model
3.6.1. Derived from P3M3®
3.6.1.1. as stated in official publication:
3.6.1.1.1. "The MoV maturity model mimics the P3M3 structure outlined in Figure D.1."
3.6.2. 5 Levels of maturity
3.6.2.1. Level 1 – Awareness process
3.6.2.2. Level 2 – Repeatable process
3.6.2.3. Level 3 – Defined process
3.6.2.4. Level 4 – Managed process
3.6.2.5. Level 5 – Optimized process
3.7. Management of Risk (M_o_R®) Maturity Model
3.7.1. Derived from P3M3®
3.7.2. 5 Levels of maturity
3.7.2.1. Level 1: Initial
3.7.2.2. Level 2: Repeatable
3.7.2.3. Level 3: Defined
3.7.2.4. Level 4: Managed
3.7.2.5. Level 5: Optimised
3.8. Portfolio, Programme, Project (P3O®) Offices Maturity Model
3.8.1. Derived from P3M3®
3.8.1.1. as stated in official publication:
3.8.1.1.1. "P3M3 provides a very useful input into the development of a P3O blueprint in terms of current and target portfolio, programme and project management capabilities."
3.9. ITIL® Maturity Model
3.9.1. http://www.axelos.com/gempdf/ITIL_Maturity_Model_v1_2W.pdf
3.9.2. Maturity level definitions are aligned with COBIT® and CMMI® definitions
3.9.3. 5 Levels of maturity
3.9.3.1. Level 1: Initial
3.9.3.2. Level 2: Repeatable
3.9.3.3. Level 3: Defined
3.9.3.4. Level 4: Managed
3.9.3.5. Level 5: Optimized
4. PMI
4.1. Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3®)
4.1.1. 4 Levels of maturity
4.1.1.1. Level 1: Standardize
4.1.1.2. Level 2: Measure
4.1.1.3. Level 3: Control
4.1.1.4. Level 4: Continually Improve
4.1.2. official website
4.1.2.1. http://opm3online.pmi.org/
5. Software Engineering Institute (SEI)
5.1. Capability Maturity Model (CMM)
5.1.1. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/
5.1.2. The ‘parent’ / ‘grandfather‘ of the majority of maturity models is the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) published by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) based at Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, US in 1986.
5.1.3. 5 Levels of maturity
5.1.3.1. Level 1: Initial
5.1.3.1.1. Processes are ad-hoc, chaotic, or actually few processes are defined.
5.1.3.2. Level 2: Repeatable
5.1.3.2.1. Basic processes are established and there is a level of discipline to stick to these processes.
5.1.3.3. Level 3: Defined
5.1.3.3.1. All processes are defined, documented, standardized and integrated into each other.
5.1.3.4. Level 4: Managed
5.1.3.4.1. Processes are measured by collecting detailed data on the processes and their quality.
5.1.3.5. Level 5: Optimising
5.1.3.5.1. Continuous process improvement is adopted and in place by quantitative feedback and from piloting new ideas and technologies.
5.2. Capability Maturity Model Integrated (CMMI)
6. ITSMF
6.1. IT Service Management Capability Maturity Model (ITSM-CMM)
6.1.1. aligned to ITIL®
7. Harold Kerzner
7.1. Kerzner Project Management Maturity Model (KPM3 or K-PMMM)
7.1.1. https://www.iil.com/kpm3/
7.1.2. 5 Levels of maturity
7.1.2.1. Level 1: Common Language
7.1.2.2. Level 2: Common Process
7.1.2.3. Level 3: Singular Methodology
7.1.2.4. Level 4: Benchamarking
7.1.2.5. Level 5: Continuous Improvement
8. Gartner
8.1. Gartner, Program and Portfolio Management (PPM) Maturity Model
8.2. Web Analytics Maturity Model
8.2.1. 5 Levels of maturity
9. PMO Tools
9.1. The PMO Maturity Cube
9.1.1. http://pmotools.org/pmocube/index.php/homeController
9.1.2. 3 Maturity Models
9.1.2.1. Service: A.1.7 - Managing one or more portfolios (Scope: Enterprise/Approach: Strategic)
9.1.2.1.1. Level 0: The PMO does not provide this service.
9.1.2.1.2. Level 1: The PMO maintains a list of active projects throughout the organization.
9.1.2.1.3. Level 2: The PMO maintains a list of active projects and programs throughout the organization and establishes their prioritization but does not follow a structured portfolio management process.
9.1.2.1.4. Level 3: The PMO maintains a list of active projects and portfolios, prioritizes them throughout the organization, and establishes formal processes, acting as facilitator in the definition (identification, categorization, evaluation, selection), development (prioritize, balance and commitment) and implementation (monitoring, review and change management) of the portfolio.
9.1.2.1.5. Level 4: The PMO maintains a list of active projects and portfolios, prioritizes them throughout the organization, and establishes formal processes, acting as facilitator in the definition (identification, categorization, evaluation, selection), development (prioritize, balance and commitment) and implementation (monitoring, review and change management) of the portfolio. The PMO uses an integrated system to automate the organization's portfolio management process.
9.1.2.2. Service: A.2.1 - Develop and implement the project management methodology (Scope: Enterprise/Approach: Tactical)
9.1.2.2.1. Level 0: The PMO does not provide this service.
9.1.2.2.2. Level 1: The PMO has developed a basic methodology for the organization, but it is not used consistently on all projects.
9.1.2.2.3. Level 2: The PMO has developed a standard methodology for the organization, aligning possible existing methodologies in different areas, and the methodology used in most projects in the organization.
9.1.2.2.4. Level 3: The PMO has developed a standard methodology for the organization, and it is used by all projects as it is mandatory unless a specific waiver is requested and approved.
9.1.2.2.5. Level 4: The PMO has developed and improved the standard methodology for the organization focusing on best practices and continuous improvement.
9.1.2.3. Service: A.3.3 - Monitor and control project /program performance (Scope: Enterprise/Approach: Operational)
9.1.2.3.1. Level 0: The PMO does not provide this service.
9.1.2.3.2. Level 1: The PMO monitors and controls the project /program performance considering time, cost, quality and customer satisfaction and provides follow-up reports without analysis upon request.
9.1.2.3.3. Level 2: The PMO monitors and controls the project /program performance considering time, cost, quality, and customer satisfaction and analyzes the available data.
9.1.2.3.4. Level 3: The PMO monitors and controls the project /program performance considering time, cost, quality, and customer satisfaction, analyzes data, and takes preventive and corrective actions working proactively with project /program manager and senior management.
10. PM Solutions
10.1. PM Solutions’ Project Management Maturity Model (PMS-PMMM)
10.1.1. Follows the Software Engineering Institute's (SEI) Capability Maturity Model's (CMM®)
10.1.2. Examines maturity development across ten knowledge areas in the Project Management Institute's (PMI®) A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)
10.1.3. http://www.pmsolutions.com/resources/view/what-is-the-project-management-maturity-model/
10.1.4. 5 Levels of maturity
10.1.4.1. Level 1: Initial process
10.1.4.2. Level 2: Structured process and standards
10.1.4.3. Level 3: Organizational standards and institutionalized process
10.1.4.4. Level 4: Managed process
10.1.4.5. Level 5: Optimizing process
10.2. PM Solutions’ Project Portfolio Management Maturity Model (PMS-PPMMM)
10.2.1. 5 Levels of maturity
10.2.1.1. Level 1: Initial process
10.2.1.2. Level 2: Structured process and standards
10.2.1.3. Level 3: Organizational standards and institutionalized process
10.2.1.4. Level 4: Managed process
10.2.1.5. Level 5: Optimizing process
11. Sun Microsystems
11.1. Information Lifecycle Management (ILM) Maturity Model
11.1.1. 5 Levels of maturity
11.1.1.1. Level 1: Chaotic
11.1.1.2. Level 2: Reactive
11.1.1.3. Level 3: Proactive
11.1.1.4. Level 4: Optimized
11.1.1.5. Level 5: Self-aware
12. Oracle
12.1. Oracle SOA Maturity Model
12.1.1. 6 Levels of maturity
12.1.1.1. Level 0: No SOA
12.1.1.1.1. There is no SOA approach being taken. SOA is not underway.
12.1.1.2. Level 1: Ad Hoc
12.1.1.2.1. Awareness of SOA exists and some groups are embarking on building services. There is no SOA plan being followed.
12.1.1.3. Level 2: Opportunistic
12.1.1.3.1. An approach has been decided upon and is being opportunistically applied. The approach has not been widely accepted nor adopted. It may be informally defined, or if documented, may exist primarily as “shelf ware”.
12.1.1.4. Level 3: Systematic
12.1.1.4.1. The approach has been reviewed and accepted by affected parties. There has been buy-in to the documented approach and the approach is always (or nearly always) followed.
12.1.1.5. Level 4: Managed
12.1.1.5.1. The capability is being measured and quantitatively managed via some type of governance structure. Appropriate metrics are being gathered and reported.
12.1.1.6. Level 5: Optimized
12.1.1.6.1. Metrics are being consistently gathered and are being used to incrementally improve the capability. Assets are proactively maintained to ensure relevancy and correctness.
12.2. Oracle Cloud Computing Maturity Model
12.2.1. 6 Levels of maturity
12.2.1.1. Level 0: None
12.2.1.1.1. There is no Cloud approach being taken. No elements of Cloud are being implemented.
12.2.1.2. Level 1: Ad Hoc
12.2.1.2.1. Awareness of Cloud Computing is established and some groups are beginning to implement elements of Cloud Computing. There is no cohesive Cloud Computing plan being followed.
12.2.1.3. Level 2: Opportunistic
12.2.1.3.1. An approach has been decided upon and is being opportunistically applied. The approach has not been widely accepted and redundant or overlapping approaches exist. It may be informally defined, or if documented, may exist primarily as “shelf ware”.
12.2.1.4. Level 3: Systematic
12.2.1.4.1. The approach has been reviewed and accepted by affected parties. There has been buy-in to the documented approach and the approach is always (or nearly always) followed.
12.2.1.5. Level 4: Managed
12.2.1.5.1. The capability is being measured and quantitatively managed via some type of governance structure. Appropriate metrics are being gathered and reported.
12.2.1.6. Level 5: Optimized
12.2.1.6.1. Metrics are being consistently gathered and are being used to incrementally improve the capability. Assets are proactively maintained to ensure relevancy and correctness. The potential for market mechanisms to be used to leverage inter-cloud operations has been established.
12.3. Oracle Master Data Management (MDM) Maturity Model
12.3.1. 4 Levels of maturity
12.3.1.1. Level 1: Marginal
12.3.1.2. Level 2: Stable
12.3.1.3. Level 3: BestPractice
12.3.1.4. Level 4: Transformational
13. The Open Group
13.1. Open Group Service Integration Maturity Model (OSIMM)
13.1.1. 7 Levels of maturity
13.1.1.1. Level 1: Silo
13.1.1.2. Level 2: Integrated
13.1.1.3. Level 3: Componentized
13.1.1.4. Level 4: Service
13.1.1.5. Level 5: Composite Services
13.1.1.6. Level 6: Virtualized Services
13.1.1.7. Level 7: Dynamically Re-Configurable Services
13.1.2. official website
13.1.2.1. http://www.opengroup.org/soa/source-book/osimmv2/
13.2. Open Information Security Management Maturity Model (O-ISM3)
13.2.1. 5 Levels of maturity
13.2.1.1. Level 1: Initial
13.2.1.2. Level 2: Managed
13.2.1.3. Level 3: Defined
13.2.1.4. Level 4: Controlled
13.2.1.5. Level 5: Optimized
13.2.2. official website
13.2.2.1. http://www.ism3.com/
13.2.3. official publication
13.2.3.1. https://www2.opengroup.org/ogsys/jsp/publications/PublicationDetails.jsp?publicationid=12238
14. Digital Asset Management
14.1. DAM Maturity Model (DAM3)
14.1.1. 5 Levels of maturity
14.1.1.1. Level 1: Ad Hoc
14.1.1.1.1. Exposure to the application of DAM technologies, including managing repositories and workflow systems.
14.1.1.2. Level 2: Incipient
14.1.1.2.1. Casual understanding of DAM technologies, often starting in the form of content management systems and centralised document repositories.
14.1.1.3. Level 3: Formative
14.1.1.3.1. Demonstrated experience with implementation of named DAM systems and core competencies, such as ingestion, cataloging, transformation, transcoding, distribution, etc.
14.1.1.4. Level 4: Operational
14.1.1.4.1. Managing repositories and workflow systems is core to IT with organised knowledge transfer.
14.1.1.5. Level 5: Optimal
14.1.1.5.1. Understanding and participating in forecasting enterprise DAM needs in preparation of future business requirements.
15. RIMS
15.1. RIMS Risk Maturity Model for Enterprise Risk Management
15.1.1. 5 Levels of maturity
15.1.1.1. Level 1: Ad Hoc
15.1.1.2. Level 2: Initial
15.1.1.3. Level 3: Repeatable
15.1.1.4. Level 4: Managed
15.1.1.5. Level 5: Leadership
16. MINCE2 Foundation
16.1. Maturity INcrements IN Controlled Environments (MINCE)
16.1.1. http://www.mince2.com/
16.1.2. http://www.mince2.org/
16.1.3. 5 Levels of maturity
16.1.3.1. Level 1: Activities
16.1.3.2. Level 2: Processes
16.1.3.3. Level 3: Systems
16.1.3.4. Level 4: Supply Chain
16.1.3.5. Level 5: Quality
16.1.3.6. Levels are derived form EFQM Excellence Model.
16.1.4. Tower I: People
16.1.5. Tower II: Methods and techniques
16.1.6. Tower III: Customer
16.1.7. Tower IV: Realization
16.1.8. Tower V: Knowledge
16.1.9. Tower VI: Supporting services
17. European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM)
17.1. EFQM Excellence Model (aka. INK model, “Instituut voor Nederlandse Kwaliteit")
18. Information Security
18.1. Security Awareness Maturity Model
18.1.1. 5 Levels of maturity
18.1.1.1. Level 1: Non-Existant Program
18.1.1.2. Level 2: Compliance Focused
18.1.1.3. Level 3: Promoting Awareness & Change
18.1.1.4. Level 4: Long Term Sustainment
18.1.1.5. Level 5: Metrics
18.1.2. http://www.securingthehuman.org/blog/2012/05/22/security-awareness-maturity-model
18.1.3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qopLSlEYv9Q&list=UUYzwGkfOqrevO-4TuTjPLwQ
18.2. Information Security Management Maturity Model (aka. ISM-cubed or ISM3)
18.2.1. http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/Forum/Attachments/ISM3_v2.00-HandBook.pdf
18.3. "Pragmatic Security Metrics – Applying Metametrics to Information Security" - Brotby & Hinson, 2013 p. 47
18.3.1. 5 Levels of maturity
18.3.1.1. Level 1: Ad hoc
18.3.1.1.1. Information security risks are handled on an entirely informational basis. Processes are undocumented and relatively unstable.
18.3.1.2. Level 2: Repeatable but intuitive
18.3.1.2.1. There is an emerging appreciation of information security. Security processes are not formally documented, depending largely on employee’s knowledge and experience.
18.3.1.3. Level 3: Defined process
18.3.1.3.1. Information security activities are formalized throughout the organization using policies, procedures, and security awareness.
18.3.1.4. Level 4: Managed and measurable
18.3.1.4.1. Information security activities are standardized using policies, procedures, defined and assigned roles and responsibilities, etc., and metrics are introduced for routing security operations and management purposes.
18.3.1.5. Level 5: Optimized
18.3.1.5.1. Metrics are used to drive systematic information security improvements, including strategic activities.
19. ASL BiSL Foundation
19.1. BiSL® Maturity Model
19.1.1. 5 Levels of maturity
19.1.1.1. Level 1: Initial
19.1.1.1.1. The organization does not have a stable environment in which Business Information Management processes are executed. There are however some attempts and sometimes activities are executed in order to acquire insight and knowledge. The results and the outcomes of the activities are usually unpredictable.
19.1.1.2. Level 2: Repeatable
19.1.1.2.1. The organization executes activities repetitively. Previous experience and ways of working are used for the execution of activities. Signs of a standard way of working are appearing.
19.1.1.3. Level 3: Defined and managed
19.1.1.3.1. The activities and processes are defined and documented. The processes have been well thought through. The processes have also been designed and implemented to provide quantitative and qualitative indicators that the organization can use for control and adjustment.
19.1.1.4. Level 4: Optimizing
19.1.1.4.1. The organization is characterized by continual process improvement. Mechanisms and processes have been developed to enable ongoing and controlled improvements to the process.
19.1.1.5. Level 5: Chain
19.1.1.5.1. The focus of the organization during the design and implementation, the improvement, and the mutual adjustment of processes all focus on increasing the added value within the process chain in which they participate.
19.2. ASL®2 Maturity Model
19.2.1. 5 Levels of maturity
19.2.1.1. Level 1: Initial
19.2.1.1.1. The organization does not have a stable environment in which Business Information Management processes are executed. There are however some attempts and sometimes activities are executed in order to acquire insight and knowledge. The results and the outcomes of the activities are usually unpredictable.
19.2.1.2. Level 2: Repeatable
19.2.1.2.1. The organization executes activities repetitively. Previous experience and ways of working are used for the execution of activities. Signs of a standard way of working are appearing.
19.2.1.3. Level 3: Defined and managed
19.2.1.3.1. The activities and processes are defined and documented. The processes have been well thought through. The processes have also been designed and implemented to provide quantitative and qualitative indicators that the organization can use for control and adjustment.
19.2.1.4. Level 4: Optimizing
19.2.1.4.1. The organization is characterized by continual process improvement. Mechanisms and processes have been developed to enable ongoing and controlled improvements to the process.
19.2.1.5. Level 5: Chain
19.2.1.5.1. The focus of the organization during the design and implementation, the improvement, and the mutual adjustment of processes all focus on increasing the added value within the process chain in which they participate.
20. Pink Elephant
20.1. ITIL Process Maturity
20.1.1. 6 Levels of maturity
20.1.1.1. Level 0: Absence
20.1.1.1.1. “There is absolutely no evidence of any activities supporting the process”
20.1.1.2. Level 1: Initiation
20.1.1.2.1. “There are ad-hoc activities present, but we are not aware of how they relate to each other within a single process”
20.1.1.3. Level 2: Awerness
20.1.1.3.1. “We are aware of the process but some activities are still incomplete or inconsistent; there is no overall measuring or control”
20.1.1.4. Level 3: Control
20.1.1.4.1. “The process is well defined, understood and implemented”
20.1.1.5. Level 4 Integration
20.1.1.5.1. “Inputs from this process come from other well controlled processes; outputs from this process go to other well controlled processes”
20.1.1.6. Level 5 Optimization
20.1.1.6.1. “This process drives quality improvements and new business opportunities beyond the process”
20.1.2. http://www.pinkelephant.com/DocumentLibrary/UploadedContents/PinkLinkArticles/ITIL%20Process%20Maturity.pdf
21. University of California (Berkeley)
21.1. Project Management Process Maturity (PM)2 Model
21.1.1. http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~ibbs/yhkwak/pmmaturity.html
21.1.2. 5 Levels of maturity
21.1.2.1. Level 1: Ad-hoc
21.1.2.1.1. No PM processes or practices are consistently available
21.1.2.1.2. No PM data are consistently collected or analyzed
21.1.2.1.3. Functionally isolated
21.1.2.1.4. Lack of senior management support
21.1.2.1.5. Project success depends on individual efforts
21.1.2.2. Level 2: Planned
21.1.2.2.1. Informal PM processes are defined
21.1.2.2.2. Informal PM problems are identified
21.1.2.2.3. Informal PM data are collected
21.1.2.2.4. Team oriented ~weak!
21.1.2.2.5. Organizations possess strengths in doing similar work
21.1.2.3. Level 3: Managed at project level
21.1.2.3.1. Formal project planning and control systems are
21.1.2.3.2. managed
21.1.2.3.3. Formal PM data are managed
21.1.2.3.4. Team oriented ~medium!
21.1.2.3.5. Informal training of PM skills and practices
21.1.2.4. Level 4: Managed at corporate level
21.1.2.4.1. Multiple PM ~program management!
21.1.2.4.2. PM data and processes are integrated
21.1.2.4.3. PM processes data are quantitatively analyzed,
21.1.2.4.4. measured, and stored
21.1.2.4.5. Strong teamwork
21.1.2.4.6. Formal PM training for project team
21.1.2.5. Level 5: Continuous learning
21.1.2.5.1. PM processes are continuously improved
21.1.2.5.2. PM processes are fully understood
21.1.2.5.3. PM data are optimized and sustained
21.1.2.5.4. Project-driven organization
21.1.2.5.5. Dynamic, energetic, and fluid organization
21.1.2.5.6. Continuous improvement of PM processes and practices
21.1.3. Date: 2002
21.1.4. Authors:
21.1.4.1. Young Hoon Kwak, Ph.D
21.1.4.2. C. William Ibbs, Ph.D
22. OMG
22.1. Business Process Maturity Model (BPMM)
22.1.1. 5 Levels of maturity
22.1.1.1. Level 1: Initial
22.1.1.2. Level 2: Managed
22.1.1.3. Level 3: Standardized
22.1.1.4. Level 4: Predictable
22.1.1.5. Level 5: Innovating
23. Search Enginuity
23.1. SEO Maturity Model
23.1.1. 5 Stages of maturity
23.1.1.1. Stage 1: Initial / Ad-hoc
23.1.1.2. Stage 2: Repeatable
23.1.1.3. Stage 3: Defined
23.1.1.4. Stage 4: Managed & Measured
23.1.1.5. Stage 5: Optimized
24. ION Interactive
24.1. Search Marketing Maturity Model
24.1.1. 5 Levels of maturity
24.1.1.1. Level 1: Ad hoc
24.1.1.1.1. No management, no budget, no real structure.
24.1.1.2. Level 2: Engaged
24.1.1.2.1. Some executive awareness, basic keyword research, limited testing of landing pages.
24.1.1.3. Level 3: Structured
24.1.1.3.1. Actual budget, management responsibility, more detailed keyword research, some competitive research/insight.
24.1.1.4. Level 4: Managed
24.1.1.4.1. Active executive participation, daily management, professional bid management of keywords, competitive benchmarking.
24.1.1.5. Level 5: Optimized
24.1.1.5.1. Strategic executive participation, significant budget, integrated multi-channel analytics, segmentation of audiences etc.
25. This freeware, non-commercial mind map was carefully hand crafted with passion and love for learning and constant improvement ... (please share, like and give feedback - your feedback and comments are my main motivation for further elaboration. THX!)
25.1. Questions / issues / errors? What do you think about my work? Your comments are highly appreciated. Please don't hesitate to contact me for :-) Mirosław Dąbrowski, Poland/Warsaw.
25.1.1. http://www.miroslawdabrowski.com
25.1.2. http://www.linkedin.com/in/miroslawdabrowski
25.1.3. https://www.google.com/+MiroslawDabrowski
25.1.4. https://play.spotify.com/user/miroslawdabrowski/
25.1.5. https://twitter.com/mirodabrowski
25.1.6. miroslaw_dabrowski
26. TMMi Foundation
26.1. Testing Maturity Model (TMM)
26.1.1. 5 Levels of maturity
26.1.1.1. Level 1: Initial
26.1.1.2. Level 2: Definition
26.1.1.3. Level 3: Integration
26.1.1.4. Level 4: Management and measurement
26.1.1.5. Level 5: Optimisation
27. Martin Hopkinson
27.1. The Project Risk Maturity Model (RMM)
27.1.1. 4 Levels of maturity
27.1.1.1. Level 1: Naïve
27.1.1.1.1. Although a project risk management process may have been initiated, its design or application is fundamentally flawed. At this level, it is likely that the process does not add value.
27.1.1.2. Level 2: Novice
27.1.1.2.1. The project risk management process influences decisions taken by the project team in a way that is likely to lead to improvements in project performance as measured against its objectives. However, although the process may add value, weaknesses with either the process design or its implementation result in significant benefits being unrealised.
27.1.1.3. Level 3: Normalised
27.1.1.3.1. The project risk management process is formalised and implemented systematically. Value is added by implementing effective management responses to significant sources of uncertainty that could affect the achievement of project objectives.
27.1.1.4. Level 4: Natural
27.1.1.4.1. The risk management process leads to the selection of risk-efficient strategic choices when setting project objectives and choosing between options for project solutions or delivery. Sources of uncertainty that could affect the achievement of project objectives are managed systematically within the context of a team culture conducive to optimising project outcomes.