Change with digital technologies in education/eMM/Dimensions

Traditional capability maturity models are based on the assumption that an organisation progresses through levels of maturity. So for example, immature organisations will adopt new technologies in an ad hoc way and as the organisation matures planning systems will evolve. At the next capability level, organisations might implement monitoring and evaluation mechanisms working towards optimisation through continuous systems improvement.

From levels to synergistic maturity on multiple dimensions
A key development that arose from the evaluation of the first version of the eMM is that the concept of levels used was unhelpful (Marshall and Mitchell, 2006 ). The use of levels implies a hierarchical model where capability is assessed and built in a layered way. The key idea underlying the dimension concept in contrast, is holistic capability. Rather than the model measuring progressive levels, it describes the capability of a process from synergistic perspectives. An organization that has developed capability on all dimensions for all processes will be more capable than one that has not. Capability at the higher dimensions that is not supported by capability at the lower dimensions will not deliver the desired outcomes; capability at the lower dimensions that is not supported by capability in the higher dimensions will be ad-hoc, unsustainable and unresponsive to changing organizational and learner needs.

In thinking about the relationship between the dimensions it is helpful to consider them arranged as in Figure 1. The matrix of boxes used on the left to display capabilities corresponds with the 5 dimensions listed below. Each dimension for a given process is assessed and reported simultaneously to provide a more holistic view of the organisations capability and opportunities for improvement potential.