The governance maturity model

What the model asks

An evaluation of maturity sets how the organization has established the governance conditions and applied the governance principles (together, the governance dimensions) against the maturity scale, looking at three aspects: behaviour, effectiveness and efficiency. The scale is cumulative, each level resting on the one below, and results are recorded for every dimension on every aspect. Once the evaluation is done, the governing body should, where needed: set targets for improvement based on what suits the organization, including the positive and negative effects of each dimension; rank improvement work according to how likely inappropriate maturity is to cause harm and how likely a programme of action is to bring benefit; plan the improvements, resource them and oversee their delivery; and, to show accountability, tell the organization and, where appropriate, stakeholders what the evaluation found, how successful earlier improvement plans were and what its priorities are for the future.

What it means when one board controls another

The model's dimensions are the seven conditions and the eleven principles, and in a group each is rated at group and entity level. The most useful output is not one number but the pair: where the group sits and where its weakest controlled entity sits, with the reason for the gap.

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 model: Evaluation results recorded per dimension and aspect
• Maturity model: Improvement targets, prioritisation, plans and communication of results

Where evaluations commonly find gaps

• Results kept within the governing body with no communication or improvement plan

How this requirement enters the rating

This unit defines the dimensions. List every condition and every principle before rating, and rate each at the level where it operates. The full dimension list is on /dimensions/.

It carries 2 evidence items and 1 common gap in the model. The evidence splits across two artefacts, so record both against the same row rather than choosing the easier one. 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.