Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Web Maturity Models


Check these out next

1 of 47 Ad

More Related Content

Slideshows for you (20)


Similar to Web Maturity Models (20)

Recently uploaded (20)


Web Maturity Models

  1. 1. Web Maturity Models IA SUMMIT 2008 Vera Rhoads April 13, 2008
  2. 2. <ul><li>One cannot value what one cannot measure </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>What gets measured </li></ul><ul><li>gets done </li></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>Maturity Model Frameworks are used to understand, control and improve a product or a process </li></ul>
  5. 5. Outline <ul><li>The Research Problem </li></ul><ul><li>The Goal </li></ul><ul><li>Attributes of Maturity Frameworks </li></ul><ul><li>Other Existing Models – CMMI, IPMM, People CMM, eBusiness Maturity </li></ul><ul><li>Factors for Consideration </li></ul><ul><li>Web Maturity Model Presented </li></ul><ul><li>Research and Industry Benefits </li></ul><ul><li>Application Roadmap </li></ul>
  6. 6. The problem <ul><li>Lack of consistency in assessments of web excellence. </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of one consistent and agreed and upon classification. </li></ul><ul><li>Classifications evolve with technology and user disruptions. </li></ul>
  7. 7. The goal <ul><li>The overarching objective is to enhance the understanding of the interrelations and specific dependencies between multitude of factors (socio-economic, technical, etc.) that contribute to the success of a web property. </li></ul>
  8. 8. The goal <ul><li>develop and present a hierarchical, evolutionary model with distinctly defined stages of existence and a methodology for applying the model. </li></ul>
  9. 9. The goal <ul><li>Develop a toolkit with applicable action, budget and policies and standards template with extended application within the web properties field. </li></ul>
  10. 10. Maturity Frameworks Explained <ul><li>Three Key attributes: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge Element </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Assessment Element – methods, processes and procedure that can be used to self-assess </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improvement Element </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Innovation Theory Dissemination <ul><li>Innovation Defined as “an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption” </li></ul>
  12. 12. Innovation: five perceived attributes <ul><li>Relative Advantage </li></ul><ul><li>Compatibility </li></ul><ul><li>Complexity </li></ul><ul><li>Trialability </li></ul><ul><li>Observability </li></ul>
  13. 13. Innovation Lifecycles <ul><li>Stage One: Entry </li></ul><ul><li>Stage Two: Adoption </li></ul><ul><li>Stage Three: Adaptation </li></ul><ul><li>Stage Four: Appropriation </li></ul><ul><li>Stage Five: Invention </li></ul>
  14. 14. Maturity Frameworks Explained <ul><li>Standard Capability Maturity Methodology: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Five Levels Traditionally identified: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Initial – Ad hoc, no control </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Repeatable – Stable process </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Defined – Consistent implementation, improved understanding of the process </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Managed </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Optimizing – a foundation is established for the continued improvement and optimization of process </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  15. 15. Traditional Frameworks <ul><li>The KPAs – key process areas </li></ul><ul><li>These identify the changes the organizations need to make in order to advance to a higher level </li></ul><ul><li>Web Accelerants – attributes you need to possess to move from one level to the next </li></ul>
  16. 16. CMM Model <ul><li>Level 1. Initial – Ad hoc: the organization has no control at all. </li></ul><ul><li>Level 2. Repeatable – The organization has achieved a stable process with a Repeatable level of statistical control by initiating rigorous project management of commitments, cost, schedule, and change </li></ul><ul><li>Level 3. Defined – The organization has defined the process to ensure consistent implementation and to provide a basis for improved understanding of the process </li></ul><ul><li>Level 4. Managed – The organization has initiated comprehensive process measurements beyond those of cost and schedule performance </li></ul><ul><li>Level 5. Optimizing – The organization now has a foundation for continued improvement and optimization of the process </li></ul>
  17. 17. Why bother? <ul><li>The Web Maturity Model helps assess where organizations are </li></ul><ul><li>What is the recommended level </li></ul><ul><li>What key web accelerants they need to take to get there </li></ul>
  18. 18. The Planning Process Black Box View
  19. 19. Expected Applicability <ul><li>Business </li></ul><ul><li>ROI – Return on Investment </li></ul><ul><li>Comparative Analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Unified, objective method of measuring </li></ul><ul><li>Research </li></ul><ul><li>Repeatable framework </li></ul><ul><li>Ability to instruct into what is considered best practices </li></ul>
  20. 20. Benefits <ul><li>Provide an assessment methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Develop an extensive benchmarking tool, </li></ul><ul><li>P roactively assist in planning, budgeting and forecasting </li></ul><ul><li>Provide a Road Map for success tailored within the appropriate category </li></ul><ul><li>Provide tools for enhanced strategic planning </li></ul>
  21. 21. Model Creation and Its Components <ul><li>Company Categorization Taxonomy </li></ul><ul><li>Inputs </li></ul><ul><li>Model Engine </li></ul><ul><li>Outputs </li></ul><ul><li>The Toolkit </li></ul>
  22. 22. Company Categorization <ul><li>Size – In terms of sized companies are viewed as small, medium and large – based on factors such as number of employees, revenue and number of geographical locations. </li></ul><ul><li>Business Model – Profit, Non-Profit, Government </li></ul><ul><li>Web Property Existence – is there a web site or not </li></ul><ul><li>P recedence – did the company precede the web property creation or did the web property precede or came in existence simultaneously with the company </li></ul><ul><li>Strategic Prioritization – is the web property viewed as a strategic priority. </li></ul><ul><li>Availability of Sufficient Funding – this category is self-explanatory. </li></ul>
  23. 23. Web Properties Categorization <ul><li>Existing Categorizations: </li></ul><ul><li>By content orientation – information </li></ul><ul><li>By transactional complexity </li></ul><ul><li>By size </li></ul><ul><li>By channel orientation </li></ul><ul><li>By target audience </li></ul>
  24. 24. Web Properties Categorization <ul><li>Size </li></ul><ul><li>Business Model </li></ul><ul><li>Web Property Existence </li></ul><ul><li>Precedence </li></ul><ul><li>Strategic Prioritization </li></ul><ul><li>Availability and Allocation of Sufficient Funding </li></ul>
  25. 25. The Study Itself <ul><li>Stages within the study </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Survey Instrument Creation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Delphi Study – </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Survey Instrument Verification </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Survey Distribution </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Survey Processing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Results Analysis </li></ul></ul>
  26. 26. Expected Further Work <ul><li>Scope extensions: </li></ul><ul><li>Run a six month validity check </li></ul><ul><li>Extend the study to a broader audience </li></ul><ul><li>Extend the study to an international audience </li></ul>
  27. 27. Anatomy of the Study <ul><li>Profile of Recipients </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Selection Methodology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Professional Affiliations and Job Titles </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Profile of Companies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Selection Methodology and Rationale </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Profile of responses received </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Types of Companies </li></ul></ul>
  28. 28. Challenges of the Study-Lessons Learned <ul><li>Area </li></ul><ul><li>Distribution </li></ul><ul><li>Participant Solicitation </li></ul><ul><li>Participant Responses </li></ul><ul><li>Survey Validity </li></ul><ul><li>Valuable Lesson </li></ul><ul><li>Attachments can be problematic </li></ul><ul><li>Language needs to be as non-technical as possible </li></ul><ul><li>Persistence, Persistence, Persistence </li></ul>
  29. 29. Findings of the Study <ul><li>Distribution of Companies </li></ul>
  30. 30. Findings of the Study <ul><li>Historical Perspective – Year of Emergence </li></ul>
  31. 31. Findings of the Study <ul><li>Rankings of the Companies by the Researcher </li></ul><ul><li>Rankings of the Companies Themselves – TBD </li></ul><ul><li>Rankings of the Companies by the Model </li></ul><ul><li>Comparative Analysis </li></ul>
  32. 32. Preliminary Rankings Overall Distribution by Model Level
  33. 33. The WPQE Model
  34. 34. Inputs and Outputs <ul><li>INPUTS  </li></ul><ul><li>1.Budget and Financial Factors </li></ul><ul><li>2.  Social and Political Factors </li></ul><ul><li>3.  Technology Acceptance </li></ul><ul><li>4.  Innovation Levels </li></ul><ul><li>5.  Usability </li></ul><ul><li>6.   Priority Allocation </li></ul><ul><li>7. Industry Positioning </li></ul><ul><li>OUTPUTS </li></ul>
  35. 35. Outputs <ul><li>L evel 1 - Presence and Established Information Delivery – At this stage the company has made its foray into the Internet, put a stake in the ground. From a historical perspective this is the earliest </li></ul><ul><li>Level 2 - Information Processing </li></ul><ul><li>Level 3 - Knowledge Creation </li></ul><ul><li>Level 4 - Business Value clearly identified and derived </li></ul><ul><li>Level 5 - True Excellence through an Integrated, Personalized and Collaborative environment </li></ul>
  36. 36. Evolutionary Stages
  37. 37. Measurement Tools <ul><li>One cannot value what one cannot measure </li></ul>
  38. 38. Inside the Model Engine Size Factors 1, 2, 6 Environment Financial Factors Corporate Vision factors
  39. 39. Ultimate Evolutionary Paths <ul><li>Large for Profit </li></ul>Year pre- 1995 1997 2000-02 2005 2007
  40. 40. Ultimate Evolutionary Paths <ul><li>Medium Non for Profit and Government </li></ul>Year 1995 1999 2004 2006 2008
  41. 41. Ultimate Evolutionary Paths <ul><li>Small for Profit </li></ul>Year 1995 1999 2001 2003-2007 2009-11
  42. 42. The Toolkit <ul><li>Standard Templates </li></ul><ul><li>All inclusive, detailed </li></ul><ul><li>Frequently updated </li></ul><ul><li>Continuous Feedback Loop </li></ul>
  43. 43. Conclusions <ul><li>Evolutionary Steps are concrete and measurable </li></ul><ul><li>A system can be devised to represent these </li></ul><ul><li>There is applicability to the model </li></ul><ul><li>There is more consistency related to size and leadership than to any other category </li></ul>
  44. 44. Web Maturity Model
  45. 45. Governance Models <ul><li>Centralized </li></ul><ul><li>Decentralized </li></ul><ul><li>Federated </li></ul><ul><li>Hybrid </li></ul>Sample Governance Models: Garth A. Buchholz has a great PDF in Google Base
  46. 46. Implications for Future Research <ul><li>Conduct a broader study </li></ul><ul><li>Internationalize the sample </li></ul><ul><li>Generate universal validity of the model </li></ul>
  47. 47. Questions?

Editor's Notes