Capability Maturity Assessment
Rating each business capability on how well it is currently performed, so investment can be directed at the gap between importance and maturity.
A capability map says what the business does. The maturity assessment says how well, and the two together are what make the map an investment tool rather than a diagram.
A workable scale is small: ad hoc (inconsistent, person-dependent), defined (a documented process, inconsistently followed), managed (consistent and measured), optimised (measured and continuously improved). Finer scales invite argument about the boundary between levels and add nothing.
The output that matters is the cross-plot of business importance against current maturity. Four quadrants, each with a different action:
High importance, low maturity — the investment priority. This is where the map earns its cost, and the list is usually short and uncomfortable.
High importance, high maturity — protect and keep funded. Frequently under-invested because it is working.
Low importance, high maturity — over-invested. A candidate for reduced spend, or evidence that the importance rating is wrong.
Low importance, low maturity — leave alone, or outsource.
The discipline that keeps it honest: rate against evidence — cycle time, error rate, cost per transaction, customer satisfaction — rather than the opinion of whoever owns the capability.