Cited by 1,201Information Technology Governance and StrategySoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesInformation Systems Education and Curriculum Development

Developing Maturity Models for IT Management: A Procedure Model and its Application

Open access
Becker, Jörg, Knackstedt, Ralf, Pöppelbuß, Jens·2009·Business & Information Systems Engineering

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12599-009-0044-5

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Capability Maturity Models (CMMs) offer staged diagnostic frameworks that chart the progression from ad-hoc digital activity to optimised, continuously improving practice.

    “Capability Maturity Models (CMMs) offer staged diagnostic frameworks that chart the progression from adhoc digital activity to optimised, continuously improving practice (Paulk et al., 1993;Wendler, 2012;Becker et al., 2009).”

    From Digital transformation: a comparative analysis of SME digital maturity models (2025) · cites this paper as Becker et al., 2009

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Bendl H, Gleich R, Kraus P (2004) Wettbewerbs- vorteile durch strategieorientierte Steuerung der IT. HMD: Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik 41(239):39-47
  2. Boehm BW (1981) Software engineering econo- mics. Prentice-Hall Chamoni P, Gluchowski P (2004) Integrations- trends bei Business-Intelligence-Systemen. WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK 46(2):119-128
  3. de Bruin T, Rosemann M (2007) Using the Delphi technique to identify BPM capability areas. In: 18th Australiasian conference on information systems (ACIS). Toowoomba
  4. de Bruin T, Rosemann M, Freeze R, Kulkarni U (2005) Understanding the main phases of de- veloping a maturity assessment model. In: 16th Australasian conference on information sys- tems (ACIS). Sydney DIN (1966) DIN 66001: Sinnbilder für Datenfluß- und Programmablaufpläne. http://www.fh-je- na.de/~kleine/history/software/DIN66001- 1966.pdf. Accessed 2008-12-12
  5. Eckerson W (2006) Performance dashboards: measuring, monitoring, and managing your business. Wiley, Hoboken
  6. Frank U (2004) E-MEMO: Referenzmodelle zur ökonomischen Realisierung leistungsfähiger Infrastrukturen für Electronic Commerce. WIRT- SCHAFTSINFORMATIK 46(5):373-381
  7. Freeze R, Kulkarni U (2005) Knowledge manage- ment capability assessment: validating a knowledge assets measurement instrument. BISE -RESEARCH PAPER In: 38th Hawaii international conference on sys- tem sciences.
  8. Grothe M, Gentsch P (2000) Business Intelligence: aus Informationen Wettbewerbsvorteile ge- winnen. Addison-Wesley, München
  9. Henderson JC, Venkatraman N (1993) Strategic alignment: leveraging information technology for transforming organizations. IBM Systems Journal 38(2&3):472-484
  10. The IT Governance Institute Kulkarni U, Freeze R (2004) Development and va- lidation of a knowledge management capabili- ty assessment model. In: 25th international conference on information systems (ICIS)
  11. Lee J, Lee D, Sungwon K (2007) An overview of the Business Process Maturity Model (BPMM). In: International workshop on process aware in- formation systems (PAIS 2007).
  12. March ST, Smith G (1995) Design and natural sci- ence research on information technology. Deci- sion Support Systems 15(4):251-266
  13. Renken J (2004) Developing an IS/ICT manage- ment capability maturity framework. In: Re- search conference of the South African Insti- tute for Computer Scientists and Information Technologists (SAICSIT). Stellenbosch, 53-62
  14. Rosemann M, de Bruin T, Power B (2006) A model to measure business process management ma- turity and improve performance. In: Jeston J, Nelis J (eds) Business process management van Grembergen W, Saull R (2001) Aligning busi- ness and information technology through the balanced scorecard at a major Canadian finan- cial group. Its status measured with an IT BSC maturity model. In: 34th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS). Hawaii

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Becker, J., Knackstedt, R., & Pöppelbuß, J.
Affiliations
University of Münster (DE)
Corresponding author
Becker, Jörg
Venue
Business & Information Systems Engineering
Published
2009-05-21
Volume
1
Issue
3
Pages
213-222
ISSN
1867-0202 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2138980717
Cited by
1,201
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 128 · 2025: 95 · 2024: 100 · 2023: 119 · 2022: 117 · 2021: 101 · 2020: 95 · 2019: 92 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 47 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 51 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 40 · 2012: 27
FWCI
45.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Business & Information Systems Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Technology Governance and Strategy
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Systems Education and Curriculum Development
Keywords
maturity model, information technology management, maturity model development, procedure model, IT performance measurement, business process management, business intelligence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review