Why capability models and certifications could be flawed!! By Design :)

Most organizations claim to be at various levels of maturity levels and certifications. These capability models and certifications do convey the process focus these organizations aspire to achieve, which is definitely a differentiating factor. However, these are just not enough, since there is a basic flaw to these models. Let me explain this.

Especially for larger organizations, for evaluating its maturity level, few projects or teams are selected and evaluated whether they comply with defined processes. The experts evaluate these teams, and accordingly certify the organization to be at a particular maturity level. The fun part is that the selected set of teams/projects could account to a very small group in an organization. And based on this evaluation, the organization is either certified or not certified.

Customers when they look for maturity levels, look at the organization maturity level, because that is what these certifications mean. What they are not aware is the capability level of team that they are going to partner with. They do not know or really not look at how good they are. They go by the organization capability level. And this is the simple reason why these certifications are not a good measure on team’s capability and may not work.

Instead, we need to focus on team capability. There needs to be a means of evaluating team’s capability rather than organization’s capability. As a customer, when I know that the team with which I will partner is the best available, I know I am going to get the best returns on my investment.

The capability models and certifications focus on a top down approach; instead what is required is a bottom up approach. If each team in the organization consists of great people, then that makes it a great organization. So the focus has to be at team level or rather at the individual level.