Maturity Assessment

Maturity Assessment

When to use

Score digital maturity with evidence-backed scorecard — every score cites specific observations, not generic level descriptions.

What this skill does not do

• Does not invent interview evidence — INPUT NEEDED when observations missing.
• Does not sequence roadmap — hand off binding constraint to roadmap-builder.

Preconditions

Load org + transformation profiles; provisional mode available.

Provisional mode

Default six dimensions, 1–5 scale — see workflow below.

Trust spine

Structured-aggregation bands; evidence per score; GATE before board/exec final.

Purpose

Produce an evidence-backed maturity scorecard where every score cites specific observations — not generic level descriptions — and names the binding constraint that should drive sequencing.

Precondition: load profiles

Before scoring, read both:

• ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-strategy/org-profile.md
• ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-strategy/transformation/CLAUDE.md

If missing or template, surface practice setup bounce with /transformation:practice-setup or "provisional".

Provisional mode

Default framework: six dimensions — Strategy, Customer Experience, Operations, Technology, Organization, Culture — scored 1–5 (1 = Ad hoc, 5 = Optimized). Tag [PROVISIONAL]. Note which dimensions use profile-defined names once configured.

Workflow

Step 1: Orient

Confirm framework and scale from ## Framework preferences → Maturity framework and ## Definitions → Maturity scoring scale. Use exact dimension names from profile when configured.

Step 2: Evidence coverage check

Map inputs to dimensions before scoring:

Insufficient evidence rule: score only what's covered. Mark uncovered dimensions "insufficient evidence" — do not guess a score from general industry knowledge.

If the user wants a directional view without evidence, produce structured first pass and label unscored dimensions explicitly.

Step 3: Score each covered dimension

For each scored dimension:

• Score — on the configured scale
• Evidence — the specific observation that produced this score (not what a "3" usually looks like)
• Level-up requirement — what one level up would require for this org specifically

Tag any benchmark comparisons [sourced: …] or [unverified — …].

Step 4: Binding constraint identification

Across all dimensions, identify which one is actually gating overall progress — not just the lowest score. A flat profile often hides the one constraint that blocks everything else; call it out explicitly.

Step 5: Sequencing implication

State what the binding constraint implies for roadmap-builder and business-case prioritization — one paragraph, BLUF style.

Step 6: Narrative (BLUF)

Lead with headline finding (overall stage + binding constraint), then dimension breakdown.

Step 7: Board-ready gate

Run trust-spine GATE before external or board-facing scorecards.

Output format

CONFIDENCE: [defensible recommendation | structured first pass]
FRAMEWORK: [dimensions and scale applied — profile or provisional default]
SCOPE: [enterprise | BU | domain]

LOAD-BEARING ASSUMPTIONS:
- ...

HEADLINE: [overall maturity stage + binding constraint — one sentence]

| Dimension | Score | Evidence | What level [N+1] requires |
|---|---|---|---|
| ... | ... | [specific observation] | ... |

BINDING CONSTRAINT: [dimension] — [why this gates the others]
SEQUENCING IMPLICATION: [what to prioritize given the constraint]
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE: [dimensions not scored + what's needed to score them]
EVIDENCE GAPS: [INPUT NEEDED]

Quality checks before delivering

• Both profiles loaded (or [PROVISIONAL] tagged)
• Framework and scale match profile when configured
• Every score tied to specific evidence — not generic level descriptions
• Uncovered dimensions marked insufficient evidence — not guessed
• Binding constraint identified — not just lowest average
• No invented survey results or benchmark scores

Worked example

Input: Technology dimension — evidence: manual deployments, no CI/CD.

Expected output (excerpt):

Technology: 2/5 — Evidence: releases monthly via manual runbook [user provided]
BINDING CONSTRAINT: Technology blocks Operations target state [review]

Propose profile update

When a stable convention surfaces during this run (thresholds, naming, tone, output format, or recurring corrections), propose a profile update: show the exact diff against ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-strategy/transformation/CLAUDE.md (org-wide facts go to org-profile.md), ask for confirmation, and write only on yes. Only /transformation:practice-setup auto-applies a full profile write.

Outputs

Follows plugin CLAUDE.md § Outputs. Next: roadmap-builder, business-case, gather evidence, or steering on binding constraint.