A methodological benchmarking approach for digital maturity models

Abstract

Digital maturity models are increasingly used by organizations to evaluate their transformation capabilities and define strategic roadmaps. However, despite their popularity, little is known about the consistency and psychometric soundness of the most widely adopted self-assessment instruments. This study has two objectives: (1) to empirically demonstrate that the results obtained from different digital maturity questionnaires vary significantly for the same organization, and (2) to establish an objective benchmarking framework to evaluate the quality of these tools. The analysis focuses on three prominent models: PwC, MinTIC & iNNpulsa, and MIT & Capgemini. Based on a structured case study and survey responses from 90 non-expert participants and 15 digital transformation experts, we assess each instrument using four key criteria: uncertainty, internal consistency, theoretical validity, and suitability for self-assessment. Results reveal statistically significant discrepancies between instruments and highlight the limitations of relying on unvalidated tools for strategic decision-making. The proposed benchmarking framework offers a practical and replicable approach to guide the selection and development of digital maturity instruments, especially in resource-constrained contexts such as small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).