The Product Model Maturity Model
Twenty principles, four levels, one number between 20 and 80. Most maturity models are a colour-coded grid that tells a leadership team what it already believes. This one scores the things a product organisation actually does: how work arrives at a team, what the team is accountable for, how cheaply it can be wrong, and what happens when something does not work. It is the model behind the ten-minute Product Model Maturity Assessment, and it is free to use, teach and adapt.
Every principle sits at one of four levels, and the sum is the index
The levels are not grades. They describe how an organisation behaves, and each one is a reasonable place to be for a while. A delivery team inside an agency is working correctly. The question the model answers is whether you are where you meant to be, and whether your own teams agree with you about it.
Delivery teams
Work arrives as tickets with the solution already decided. Success is measured in things shipped and dates met. Discovery, where it happens, is a phase somebody else did.
Feature teams
Work arrives as features on a roadmap. Teams have some say in how, almost none in what. Metrics exist but nobody is accountable to them, and the roadmap survives contact with evidence.
Product teams
Work arrives as problems with a target outcome. The trio decides how to solve them, tests risky assumptions before building, and reviews what moved after release.
Product organisation
Teams propose the outcomes themselves and leadership funds them. Strategy is written down and known. Bets are placed openly, killed openly, and the budget visibly moves.
Twenty principles, four to a concept
The principle names come from Marty Cagan's Transformed. What is ours is the rest: the anchors that define each level, the questions that place a team on them, and the scoring. Each principle is scored by two questions, so a respondent answers forty in about ten minutes.
Product Teams
Whether teams are handed problems with an outcome attached, or features with a date attached.
- Empowered with problems to solve
- Outcomes over output
- Sense of ownership
- Collaboration
Product Strategy
Whether there is a small number of things the organisation is actually betting on, written down, and whether anyone can name them.
- Focus
- Powered by insights
- Transparency
- Placing bets
Product Discovery
Whether risks are tested before the build, and how cheaply the organisation can be wrong.
- Minimise waste
- Assess product risks
- Embrace rapid experimentation
- Test ideas responsibly
Product Delivery
Whether the team can release small, see what happened, and act on it inside a week.
- Small, frequent, uncoupled releases
- Instrumentation
- Monitoring
- Deployment infrastructure
Product Culture
Whether leadership trusts teams with decisions, and what happens in the room when something does not work.
- Principles over process
- Trust over control
- Innovation over predictability
- Learning over failure
One number, and the five that matter more
Each of the twenty principles scores 1 to 4, so the index runs from 20 to 80. A concept score is the sum of its four principles, out of 16. The index is the headline, and it is the least interesting output. What a team does with the model is read the shape: which concept is weakest, and whether the people in the same team gave the same answers.
Two rules keep it honest. A single team needs at least four responses before a team median is reported, and a cross-team median needs five, because below that one loud voice is the result. And a principle answered with a half step takes the lower level, so the model never rounds an organisation upward into a band it has not reached.
What the shape tells you that the number does not
Before a transformation pilot at Deviniti Apps, four members of the Luna team answered the survey. The team scored 58.5 out of 80, which puts it in the product team band rather than the delivery team band. On the number alone, there was not much to do.
The shape said otherwise. Every question about the trio came back at the top of the scale from all four people, so the structure of a product team was already in place. Focus was the weakest dimension at 2.1 out of 4: all four said effort estimates guided their planning, the single lowest-scoring answer in the survey. And on five questions the four answers spanned the entire scale. Asked how the team shares accountability for outcomes, two said each role focuses on its own deliverables and two said the team collectively owns success metrics. A team whose members describe how it works in opposite terms does not have a shared operating model, whatever the org chart says.
That is what the pilot was built to fix, and the quarter that followed took trial-to-paid conversion from 26% to 59%.
Three ways to run it
- On your own, in ten minutes. The public assessment scores one person's read of their organisation and emails the result with the six principles you are furthest from.
- Across a team. Run it with everyone in a trio or a squad and compare the answers rather than averaging them. Disagreement inside a team is the finding.
- Across an organisation. Run it per team before a transformation, and again a quarter later on the concepts the pilot touched. That is the shape of the assessment inside a product operating model transformation, alongside interviews and observed ceremonies.
It travels badly as a leadership exercise done alone. The value is in the gap between how leadership thinks the organisation works and how the teams say it does, and you only see that gap by asking both.
Use it, share it, credit it
The model, its principles, anchors and scoring are © Aleksander Uznański / ProductTrio and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0). Put it in your slides, teach from it, translate it, run it inside your own company, use it commercially. Two conditions. Credit like this:
And share-alike: if you adapt it, a translation, your own extended set of principles, a redrawn scale, release the adaptation under the same licence, say it was adapted, and do not suggest that Aleksander endorses your version. Using it unchanged inside your own deck or course does not make those materials share-alike.
The principle names are Marty Cagan's, from Transformed, and that book is the better place to start if you want the argument behind them. What this model adds is a way to score them.
Want to know where your organisation actually sits?
Ten minutes, twenty principles, your Maturity Index by email. Or book a call and we will read your result together.
Assess your team
.svg)
.svg)
