# Trends and Recommendations for Enhancing Maturity Models in Supply Chain Management and Logistics
## 3 Results
### Content Results
#### 3.2.2 Design Criteria of MMs for SCML
The number of dimensions covered by the models ranges from zero to 22, while sub-dimensions range from zero to 117. Specifically, the majority of MMs use four dimensions (28 occurrences), followed by three dimensions (24 occurrences) and five dimensions (22 occurrences). It is interesting to note that several MMs have been influenced by the SCOR model in terms of selecting the number and types of dimensions, as seen in [11; 110; 111; 112; 113]. In fact, since this study concentrates on process-based models within SCML, the activities of plan, source, make, and deliver are common across various contexts or industries. While not widely adopted, some modelsalso incorporate the return phase after the four aforementioned phases [7; 114]. In terms of sub-dimensions, 46 occurrences indicate the absence of sub-dimensions. Figure 13 illustrates the relationship between the number of levels, dimensions, and sub-dimensions, with the size of the circumference representing the occurrence of MMs. From the elements of MMs, we can identify the tools used for maturity assessment. According to [115], maturity assessment tools can be categorized into three major types based on their complexity. The simplest type is maturity grids, which typically present activity descriptions for each maturity level in a matrix or table format (e.g., [114; 116]). A more complex type is Likert-like questionnaires, where respondents quantify their adherence to best practices on a numerical scale from one to n by answering specific questions (e.g., [117; 118]). The most complex type is CMM-based MMs, which include both generic and specific objectives for each focus area and maturity level (e.g., [24; 119]). In addition to these typologies, two less prominent types have been identified in the literature. Maturity frameworks are collections of frameworks that offer guidance for achieving best practices without providing a systematic approach [119]. On the other hand, roadmaps provide guidelines for improving maturity levels [120]. However, many roadmap proposals are considered too general and not useful for users [15]. Among the analyzed MMs for SCML, Likert-like questionnaires (63 occurrences) and maturity grids (50 occurrences) are the most frequently used assessment tools. Less commonly used are CMM-based models (6 occurrences), maturity frameworks (three occurrences), and roadmaps (one occurrence). It can be concluded that most researchers propose assessment tools that are not overly complex and allow for easy usage, such as questionnaires or matrix-based assessments. Table 4 summarizes the results regarding maturity assessment tools and design process approaches. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Assessment Tool/ Design Process** & **Theory-Driven** & **Practitioner-Based** & **Mixed** & **Other** & **Total** \\ \hline Maturity grid & 24 & 2 & 23 & 1 & 50 \\ Likert-like questionnaire & 20 & 2 & 38 & 3 & 63 \\ Framework & 3 & - & - & - & 3 \\ CMM & 3 & - & 3 & - & 6 \\ Roadmap & - & - & - & 1 & 1 \\ Other & 2 & - & - & 1 & 3 \\ Total & 52 & 4 & 58 & 6 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: The results provide insights into the assessment tool and design approach used in MMs for SCML. Figure 13: The representation highlights the architecture of MMs for SCML by examining the relationship between the number of levels, dimensions, and sub-dimensions commonly employed.