# Trends and Recommendations for Enhancing Maturity Models in Supply Chain Management and Logistics
## 3 Results
### Content Results
#### 3.2.3 Application Criteria of MMs for SCML  
The last classification analysis focused on the application of MMs for SCML. To recap, MMs go through three stages: development, validation, and continuous application. Many research studies propose new MMs to address gaps in the literature, while others enhance existing MMs or use them as a reference. For example, [PERSON] et al. [121] proposes a Supply Chain Quality Management MM based on [PERSON] et al.'s proposal [122]. [PERSON] uses the dimensions of the General Practitioner Information Systems Measurement Model as a foundation for a MM in supplier relationship management in hospital settings [123]. Similarly, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [124] integrate [PERSON]'s tool [36] to measure the maturity of Brazilian rail transport suppliers. Regardless of the stage of use, these MMs are applied with specific purposes [33]. Descriptive MMs provide a snapshot of an entity's current state, whether it's a process, object, or person, without specifying improvement points or objectives. In contrast, prescriptive MMs, based on the entity's current state, aim to guide it toward a future state by providing improvement guidelines [69]. Comparative MMs, on the other hand, serve as benchmarking tools to compare business processes, organizations, or industrial sectors at different levels [21]. The use phase of the MM (development, validation, application) and the MM's objective (descriptive, comparative, prescriptive) are closely linked, representing the evolution phases of the MM's life cycle, as pointed out by [PERSON] et al. [34].  
Most of the research shows a strong inclination towards the development of new MMs (104 occurrences). MM validation is also relevant (68 occurrences), while MM application (24 occurrences) and integration (24 occurrences) are less influential. Different approaches can be followed for the development of a MM, including theory-driven, practitioner-based, or mixed-design approaches. Theory-driven approaches commonly rely on literature research, whereas practitioner-based approaches make use of empirical development tools such as interviews [87; 125; 126], focus groups [8; 16], and Delphi studies [18; 36; 127]. Analytical approaches, such as AHP [10; 128; 129], fuzzy theory [100; 109; 130], and principal component analysis [131], are less frequent but still noteworthy. In terms of MM validation, case studies are the most commonly used tools, while empirical analysis [132] and simulation hold lesser importance [89]. Case studies are also frequently employed for MM applications (Figure 14). Among the various industrial sectors, the automotive sector (13 occurrences) and manufacturing in general (11 occurrences) are most commonly considered, although many MMs do not specify the sector of application (21 occurrences). Case studies serve as both descriptive and comparative tools. For example, [PERSON] and [PERSON] validate their MM by assessing the current status of four fashion companies [105]. Similarly, [PERSON] develops and validates a MM based on 13 companies in the retail sector [133]. Some examples of applied MMs with a comparative purpose include [PERSON] et al.'s comparison of BIM maturity in 53 manufacturing companies [134], [PERSON] et al.'s application to 16 automotive organizations [135], and [PERSON] and [PERSON]'s evaluation of the relationship between ERP and supply chain management maturity in 250 organizations [136]. Regarding the three purposes of MMs for SCML, those of a descriptive nature hold the greatest relevance (73 occurrences), followed by comparative MMs (38 occurrences) and prescriptive MMs (15 occurrences).