IVI Framework Viewer

Representative POMs are described for Assessment Execution at each level of maturity.

1Initial

• Practice

  Use custom-made tools to run the assessments.

  Outcome

  Some assessment data can be gathered through use of custom-made tools.

  Metric

  % of IT capability assessments conducted with custom-made tools.

• Practice

  Practices with respect to collecting evidence/data that accurately reflects current-state performances are ad hoc, occurring on a best endeavour basis.

  Outcome

  _

  Metric

  _

2Basic

• Practice

  Use standardized, manual assessment tools (e.g. standardized questionnaires).

  Outcome

  There is reduction of costs through scale effects.

  Metric

  % of IT capability assessments conducted with custom-made tools. % of IT capability assessments conducted with standardized tools.

• Practice

  Capture some key current-state data from stakeholders in IT.

  Outcome

  Time series comparison and benchmarking over time is possible.

  Metric

  % of requested respondents providing current-state data for assessments.

3Intermediate

• Practice

  Execute assessments based on the assessment plan and include standard elements of the selected framework (such as kick-off meetings, distribution of pre-assessment information to participants, etc).

  Outcome

  Consistent assessment execution results in scale effects and increases buy-in.

  Metric

  % of assessment adherence to a process/blueprint for conducting IT capability assessments.

• Practice

  Set up tools leveraging some automation techniques such as scripting (e.g. data collection via spreadsheets that are then analysed in different spreadsheets).

  Outcome

  Scale effects from automated tools are experienced.

  Metric

  % of IT capability assessments conducted with custom-made tools. % of IT capability assessments conducted with standardized tools.

• Practice

  Capture current-state data from all relevant stakeholders within IT and some key stakeholders in other business units.

  Outcome

  Necessary assessment data/evidence is collected from all key IT stakeholders and some other business units stakeholders. Time series comparison and benchmarking over time becomes more reliable.

  Metric

  % of requested respondents providing current-state data for assessments.

4Advanced

• Practice

  Introduce an integrated, central assessment tool.

  Outcome

  There is a high degree of automation across the assessment process.

  Metric

  % of IT capability assessments conducted with custom-made tools. % of IT capability assessments conducted with standardized tools.

• Practice

  Capture all necessary current-state data and evidence from all key stakeholders organization-wide.

  Outcome

  The data gathered from organization-wide stakeholders is valuable in setting future improvement targets.

  Metric

  % of requested respondents providing current-state data for assessments.

5Optimized

• Practice

  Regularly review and improve the assessment tool following feedback from assessments undertaken.

  Outcome

  Regular improvement of the assessment tool supports effective organization-wide capability assessments.

  Metric

  % of IT capability assessments conducted with custom-made tools. % of IT capability assessments conducted with standardized tools. Yes/No indicators re the existence of a regular assessment tool review and improvement cycle.

• Practice

  Proactively secure the availability of data sources in the business ecosystem for upcoming assessments and optimize the process for so doing through feedback and learning from previous assessments.

  Outcome

  Data from the business ecosystem is always available on request and is valuable in informing the setting of future improvement targets.

  Metric

  % of requested respondents providing current-state data for assessments.