2020iSys - Brazilian Journal of Information SystemsOpen access

Maturity Models Architecture: A large systematic mapping

Erasmo Leite Monteiro, Paulo Maciel

Open full text 21 citations

Abstract

Maturity models are widespread in research and in particular, IT practitioner communities. However, theoretically sound, methodologically rigorous and empirically validated maturity models are quite rare. This systematic mapping paper focuses on the challenges faced during the development of maturity models. More specifically, it explores the literature on maturity models and standard guidelines to develop maturity models, the challenges identified and solutions proposed. Our systematic mapping revealed over six hundred articles on maturity models. Extant literature reveals that researchers have primarily focused on developing new maturity models pertaining to domain-specific problems and/or new enterprise technologies. We find rampant re-use of the design structure of widely adopted models such as Nolan’s Stage of Growth Model, Crosby’s Grid, and Capability Maturity Model (CMM). We also identify three dominant views of maturity models and provide guidelines for various approaches to constructing maturity models with a standard vocabulary. We finally propose using process theories and configurational approaches to address the main theoretical criticisms with regard to maturity models and conclude with some recommendations for maturity model developers.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Maturity models are widespread in research and in particular, IT practitioner communities. However, theoretically sound, methodologically rigorous and empirically validated maturity models are quite rare. This systematic mapping paper focuses on the challenges faced during the development of maturity models. More specifically, it explores the literature on maturity models and standard guidelines to develop maturity models, the challenges identified and solutions proposed. Our systematic mapping revealed over six hundred articles on maturity models. Extant literature reveals that researchers have primarily focused on developing new maturity models pertaining to domain-specific problems and/or new enterprise technologies. We find rampant re-use of the design structure of widely adopted models such as Nolan’s Stage of Growth Model, Crosby’s Grid, and Capability Maturity Model (CMM). We also identify three dominant views of maturity models and provide guidelines for various approaches to constructing maturity models with a standard vocabulary. We finally propose using process theories and configurational approaches to address the main theoretical criticisms with regard to maturity models and conclude with some recommendations for maturity model developers.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 21 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Maturity models are widespread in research and in particular, IT practitioner communities. However, theoretically sound, methodologically rigorous and empirically validated maturity models are quite rare. This systematic mapping paper focuses on the challenges faced during the development of maturity models. More specifically, it explores the literature on maturity models and standard guidelines to develop maturity models, the challenges identified and solutions proposed. Our systematic mapping revealed over six hundred articles on maturity models. Extant literature reveals that researchers have primarily focused on developing new maturity models pertaining to domain-specific problems and/or new enterprise technologies. We find rampant re-use of the design structure of widely adopted models such as Nolan’s Stage of Growth Model, Crosby’s Grid, and Capability Maturity Model (CMM). We also identify three dominant views of maturity models and provide guidelines for various approaches to constructing maturity models with a standard vocabulary. We finally propose using process theories and configurational approaches to address the main theoretical criticisms with regard to maturity models and conclude with some recommendations for maturity model developers.

Key concepts: Maturity (psychological), Capability Maturity Model, Extant taxon, Systematic review, Service Integration Maturity Model, Process (computing), Computer science, Data science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Maturity Models Architecture: A large systematic mapping — Research Paper | ScholarLens