Governance maturity scale

What the model asks

The maturity with which a principle is applied is expressed across the three aspects, consolidated in Table 6 and described per level: level 0 undefined, the principle not adopted or applied, any practices found not intentionally used for it; level 1 limited, adopted but the body cannot explain why it matters and not all necessary components adopted; level 2 emerging, adopted but the body cannot succinctly explain how practices apply it, practices used inconsistently, component types missing and components not widely communicated or understood; level 3 formalized, formally adopted with the body able to explain how it is applied, but practices not assessed and components not reviewed; level 4 measured, maturity measured, sufficient resources ensured, the body able to describe the principle's purpose and receiving stakeholder feedback on its achievement, all required components adopted, communicated and implemented, practices assessed and reported, components reviewed and corrected; level 5 optimizing, the body committed to continually improving its governance and the application of the principle, with its activities ensuring that application continually improves.

What it means when one board controls another

The consolidated level should be reported per principle and per entity, not only for the group. A group average of 3 can sit on one entity at 0 and another at 5. The draft treats outliers as information, and in a controlled group the outlier is often the entity with the least autonomy.

Evidence an evaluator asks for

A maturity rating is a claim about how the group governs. The evidence is what proves it operated. Keep both, and keep them together.

• Maturity scale: Consolidated maturity level per principle derived from the three aspect ratings

Where evaluations commonly find gaps

• Levels assigned without the per-aspect evidence behind them

How this requirement enters the rating

This unit governs the instrument. The scale must be fixed before the ratings, the level labels must be the published ones, and the aspect-specific descriptions must be used for the aspect being rated. The six levels are on /scale/.

It carries 1 evidence item and 1 common gap in the model. One item is enough only if it is the artefact that proves the practice operated, not a policy that says it should. The group application on this page is ours; the requirement and evidence are the model's, stated in our own words.

Requirements that sit beside it

• 5.4.1 General: the six-point scale
• 5.4.2 Governance behaviour scale
• 4.1 General: the purpose of evaluating governance maturity and its three aspects

The three aspects The six-point scale All 35 requirements

Note on the draft: The requirement, evidence and gaps on this page are read from ISO 37004:2023, which the draft states it builds on. The draft's own clause body is not public, so this page does not state it. The clause reference at the top is the draft's public contents heading that this requirement sits under.