Digital maturity assessment

digital-maturity-assessment

Assesses how effectively an organization uses digital technology, data, and ways of working to create value, scoring seven dimensions on a five-level maturity scale, locating the gaps against the organization's ambition, and producing a roadmap.

The five maturity levels, the seven dimensions, the target-setting step, and the pitfalls live in references/maturity.md. Load that file before assessing and score against its level descriptors exactly.

When to use

The user wants to understand where an organization stands on digital and what to do next: a transformation baseline, a readiness check, or a roadmap input. The unit is an organization or business unit. It assesses maturity, not the technology estate alone; the soft dimensions matter as much as the hard ones.

Language

Conduct the session and write the report in the language the user is writing in. The reference file is English; keep the framework keyed to it regardless of output language.

Inputs

• ORGANIZATION (required): the organization or unit to assess.
• TARGET (optional but valuable): the ambition or target maturity level. Maturity is not maximized for its own sake, so gaps are only meaningful against a target. Ask if it is unclear.
• EVIDENCE (optional): documents, metrics, systems in place, and examples. Where evidence is thin, gather it by interviewing the user during the session rather than assuming.

Orchestration map

Stage 1  Dimension Assessment ── 7 assessor subagents IN PARALLEL ──┐  (score 1-5 with evidence, gap to target)
Stage 2  Synthesis            ── 1 agent, needs all 7 ──────────────┘  (profile, binding gaps, sequenced roadmap)

Tell each subagent its final message is the return value: structured data, not prose for a human. Where evidence is missing for a dimension, the assessor should flag what it would need rather than scoring on aspiration.

Stage 1: Dimension Assessment (PARALLEL)

Dispatch seven assessor subagents at once, one per dimension. Give each the shared framing plus its dimension and the five-level scale from the reference file.

Shared framing (send to every assessor):

Assess one dimension of digital maturity for [ORGANIZATION] against the five-level scale. Score what is actually in production and in behavior, not what is planned or piloted. Target level: [TARGET]. Return:

• Current level (1 to 5) with the evidence behind it
• What holds it at this level and what the next level would require
• Gap to target and its size
• Confidence (high, medium, low); if evidence is thin, say what is needed rather than guessing high

Evidence and context: [EVIDENCE]

Assign the seven dimensions from the reference file. Collect all seven before continuing, and re-dispatch any that fail.

Stage 2: Synthesis (SEQUENTIAL, needs all 7)

One agent assembles the maturity picture:

1. Draw the profile. All seven dimension scores together, showing the uneven shape rather than a single average. The profile is the finding; an average hides it.
2. Find the binding gaps. The dimensions furthest below target, and the imbalances where a lagging dimension caps the value of an advanced one (the classic case: strong technology stranded behind weak people and culture).
3. Sequence the roadmap. The moves that raise the binding dimensions toward the target, split into quick wins and longer plays, recognizing the lagging dimension as the constraint on overall value.
4. Verdict. Overall maturity, the few moves that matter most, and the realistic path to the target.

Report structure

Write a thorough markdown report and save it to digital-maturity-assessment-<organization-slug>-<YYYY-MM-DD>.md (today's date) in the working directory unless the user names another location.

1. Header. The organization, the target ambition, the date, and a note that scores reflect what is in production and in behavior.
2. Maturity profile. A table or radar-style layout of all seven dimensions with current level, target, gap, and confidence, scannable at a glance. Show the profile, not just an average.
3. Per-dimension detail (seven sections). For each: the level, the evidence, what holds it there, and what the next level requires.
4. Binding gaps and imbalances. The dimensions that most constrain value, including advanced dimensions stranded behind lagging ones.
5. Roadmap. Sequenced moves toward the target, quick wins and longer plays, focused on the binding dimensions.
6. Verdict. Overall maturity and the realistic path to the target.
7. Caveats. Scores reflect evidence available and are judgment, not certification; maturity is not an end in itself but relative to ambition; and the lagging dimension, not the average, governs the value the organization actually realizes.

Principles

• Score reality, not aspiration. Production and behavior, not decks and pilots.
• The soft dimensions bind. People, culture, strategy, and data drag maturity down more often than technology lifts it.
• Profile over average. The uneven shape is the finding; the constraint is the lagging dimension.
• Anchor to a target. Gaps and roadmaps are meaningful only against the ambition, not against level 5 for its own sake.