Measurement aggregation

What the model asks

Maturity is evaluated per principle across the three aspects, and the evaluation intent should guide aggregation: by maturity aspect (overall behaviour, effectiveness or efficiency across all principles), by principle (overall maturity in applying one principle), or for the organization's governance as a whole (for comparison with others). An aggregated result should be an integer from 0 to 5 on the maturity scale, reflect the dominant level and appropriately reflect outliers; the framework uses the arithmetic mean rounded down to the nearest integer, and the reasons for outliers, which can say something important about the organization's governance, should be considered and can be investigated through consultation.

What it means when one board controls another

Aggregation choices become political in a group. Aggregating by entity shows which boards are lagging; aggregating for the group produces a number for the annual report; aggregating by aspect shows where the model is weak overall. Fix the method before the ratings and report all three if the board will use them.

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.

• Aggregation: Aggregation method (mean rounded down) applied and outliers explained

Where evaluations commonly find gaps

• Aggregates that hide a principle at level 0 or 1
• Rounding up

How this requirement enters the rating

This unit governs aggregation. Fix the method in the design, apply it without rounding up, and record every outlier with its reason. The aggregation worksheet in the kit follows this rule.

It carries 1 evidence item and 2 common gaps 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. Both gaps are seen often enough in first evaluations that the evaluation design should test for them explicitly. 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

• 4.1 General: the purpose of evaluating governance maturity and its three aspects
• 4.2 Governance behaviour
• 4.3 Governance effectiveness

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.