At a glance
- Source
- Thordsen and Bick (2023). A decade of digital maturity models: much ado about nothing?. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 21(4), 947–976. doi:10.1007/s10257-023-00656-w
- How it was done
- The authors reviewed eleven years of research on digital maturity models and set out the main points of dispute among researchers. Systematic review. It searches for all published studies on a question, by fixed rules, and sums up what they show.
- Who took part
- Published research on digital maturity models.
- Where
- International.
“Various critical voices question the actual practical and theoretical value of DMMs, underlining the absence of objective evaluation criteria of these models and pointing out the lack of empirical data to prove the suggested relationship between maturity and performance.”
What it found
A maturity model places an organization on a ladder of levels, usually from beginner to advanced, and suggests what to do to climb.
- Many such models exist, and their value is disputed among researchers.
- Critics point to two gaps. The models have no objective criteria for judging a level. And there is little data showing that a higher level goes with better business results.
(“DMMs” in the quote stands for digital maturity models.)
When the result holds
The review is about digital maturity models in general. AI maturity models are built the same way, so the same doubts apply. That step is our inference and not a finding of the review.
Limits
- It reports a dispute. It does not itself test whether maturity predicts results.
Practices that use this study
This study supports:
Assessments linked to this study
Claim checks that cite this study
- “BCG’s AI Maturity Matrix shows how mature companies are” Needs correcting
- “Microsoft has a maturity model for responsible AI” Confirmed
- “Only 13% of companies are ready for AI” Needs correcting