--- name: lean-maturity-scorecard description: "A fixed set of capability areas scored against the standard 5-stage maturity scale (ad hoc to optimizing), each score backed by real evidence, with any area more than one stage below its own stated target flagged plainly, not smoothed over. Use when: You want an honest baseline of where a set of capabilities actually stands today, not where people assume it stands. You suspect a capability everyone treats as 'basically fine' is actually still ad hoc underneath, and you want that checked against real evidence rather than assumed. Not for: You don't have a real target level in mind for each capability yet -- this scorecard checks current state against a stated target, it doesn't set the target for you. You want to track one specific practice's post-event sustainment, not a broad capability's maturity level — that's the sustainment audit's job, a simpler holding/at-risk check, not a 5-stage scale." --- # Lean maturity scorecard A fixed set of capability areas scored against the standard 5-stage maturity scale (ad hoc to optimizing), each score backed by real evidence, with any area more than one stage below its own stated target flagged plainly, not smoothed over. Family: Foundations · Format: .xlsx · Domain: core ## What it is A lean maturity scorecard is a real, checkable answer to 'how mature is this capability, actually' -- not a self-assessed feeling, but a fixed set of capability areas each scored against the standard 5-stage CMMI-style scale (ad hoc, repeatable, defined, managed, optimizing), with a stated target level and the real evidence justifying the current score. A capability one stage below its target is a normal, expected in-progress state; more than one stage below is a real gap, computed and flagged, never left to impression. ## When to use it Use it when: - You want an honest baseline of where a set of capabilities actually stands today, not where people assume it stands. - You suspect a capability everyone treats as 'basically fine' is actually still ad hoc underneath, and you want that checked against real evidence rather than assumed. - You're deciding where to invest improvement effort next and want to see which capabilities are furthest behind their own stated target, not just which feel most urgent. Not when: - You don't have a real target level in mind for each capability yet -- this scorecard checks current state against a stated target, it doesn't set the target for you. - You want to track one specific practice's post-event sustainment, not a broad capability's maturity level — that's the sustainment audit's job, a simpler holding/at-risk check, not a 5-stage scale. ## How to fill it in - **scopeNotes** — What function or set of capabilities does this assessment cover? - **areas** — For each capability area: its current level, its target level, and the real evidence justifying the current score. - **narrative** — Drafted from the assessment's own computed gap. ## What good looks like The example below scores Northwind Fabrication's real shop-floor capabilities against the FY2027 Hoshin plan and true north statement's own already-published findings, and finds one real gap: market awareness / outbound reach sits at Ad hoc against a Defined target -- the direct operational consequence of the true north statement's own finding that this exact direction has zero committed initiatives. Full worked example, on-screen and as a downloadable .xlsx: https://www.katafacts.com/katas/lean-maturity-scorecard ## Common mistakes - **Scoring a capability by gut feel instead of real evidence.** — A score with no evidence behind it is an opinion, not a fact -- this scorecard exists specifically to catch a capability everyone assumes is fine but nobody's actually checked. - **Setting every target at the top of the scale (Optimizing).** — Not every capability needs to be optimizing -- a target should reflect what this capability actually needs to be, not a reflexive maximum that makes every area look like a gap. - **Treating a one-stage gap the same as a two-or-more-stage gap.** — One stage below target is a normal, expected in-progress state for a capability actively being built -- flagging it the same as a real, multi-stage gap would bury the areas that actually need attention first. ## What it connects to Upstream: - **Hoshin Kanri — X-Matrix** (`hoshin-kanri`) — A capability area's current level and evidence often trace directly to whether this year's Hoshin strategies touching it are underway, committed, or not yet started. - **True north statement** (`true-north-statement`) — A pillar with zero committed initiatives tracing to it is exactly where a related capability area is likely to score honestly low -- the scorecard shows the operational consequence of a gap the true north statement already found. ## Where AI helps Judgement — stays with you: - Deciding what a realistic target level looks like for a given capability - Deciding which gapped capability to tackle first Analysis — AI helps: - Tightening an area's evidence wording from rough notes into a specific, checkable statement - Drafting the narrative from the assessment's own computed gap Drudgery — automated: - Identifying which capability areas are more than one stage below target - Exporting to xlsx in the house format --- Lean maturity scorecard is licensed [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Attribution: Katafacts (katafacts.com). ## Using this skill Apply this method as part of whatever broader task, instructions, or deliverable you're already working on -- it's a method to use, not a standalone conversation to start. There is no generation tool for this catalogue yet, so draft the artifact's actual content yourself, following the fields above, the same way a person filling this out by hand would. The canonical guide page and a downloadable worked example (.xlsx) are at https://www.katafacts.com/katas/lean-maturity-scorecard.