All 35 requirements · Governance maturity model
Model requirement 6.4.3
Implementing improvement initiatives
What ISO 37004:2023 asks at 6.4.3, in our own words, and how it reads inside a controlled group. The draft's public contents heading for it is 6.4 Governance maturity improvement.
What the model asks
Improvement initiatives should be prioritized by the likelihood of negative impacts of inappropriate maturity on achieving the governance outcomes, considering the size of the gaps between evaluated results, the determined appropriate level and the targets with their time frames, and a high-level assessment of the resources needed and their availability; the rationale for prioritization should be recorded, the prioritized improvements planned and resourced, their implementation overseen by the governing body so that the intended outcomes are realized, and their results used to inform future initiatives on a continual improvement basis.
What it means when one board controls another
Improvement initiatives cross entity boundaries more often than the plan expects. A group-wide initiative that needs an entity's data or people should name the entity board that has to release them. The common failure is a plan with group owners and no entity commitment.
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.
- Improvement initiatives: Prioritised, resourced improvement plan with recorded rationale and governing body oversight
- Improvement initiatives: Results of initiatives fed into the next cycle
Where evaluations commonly find gaps
- Initiatives launched without prioritisation or oversight
- Lessons from past initiatives not carried forward
How this requirement enters the rating
This unit belongs to the evaluation and improvement sequence. Record the decision it produces, the owner and the date, and keep it with the ratings it explains.
It carries 2 evidence items and 2 common gaps in the model. The evidence splits across two artefacts, so record both against the same row rather than choosing the easier one. 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
Source for this page
- ISO 37004:2023, Governance of organizations, Governance maturity model, Guidance. The published text of the organizational governance maturity model, which the draft applies to controlled groups. Supplies the three aspects, the measurement framework, the six-point scale, the dimensions and the 35 model requirements stated on this site.
- ISO/DIS 37014 official record. The designation, title, edition, committee, ICS, stage, stage date, page count, price and abstract. Retrieved 21 October 2026.
- ISO/DIS 37014 free OBP preview. The foreword, introduction, scope, normative references, terms and definitions and the full table of contents, which ISO publishes for free. Retrieved 21 October 2026.
Retrieved 2026-10-21. The requirement above is our statement of the clause in our own words; the official text is linked so you can check it.
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.
The maturity kit, USD 299 one off. The 35-requirement register, the 54-cell maturity worksheet, the evidence list and a dated plan, as PDF, CSV and XLSX.