###### Abstract
These models are instrumental in defining the AS-IS and the TO-BE view pictures of an organization, using the maturity dimensions as key assessment areas. MM can be generic or domain specific. A generic model can be used across different industries, enabling benchmarking. However, this approach tends to be complex, with a large number of assessment questions and a terminology set that is not particularly overlapping with the vocabulary and definitions of a specific domain. In this paper, we are focused on Higher Education (HE). In this sector, maturity models have been used to assess several dimensions of HE institutions (HEIs), such as information technology (IT), process management, online learning and learning analytics [11; 12]. Several BI-related maturity models exist in the literature [10], including models that originated from academia or practice. These maturity models can be generic, such as [13; 14; 15], or domain specific, as the [16] for higher education or [17] for healthcare. A previous study reported that the use of a generic BI maturity model resulted in difficulties in correctly assessing the BI maturity level of initiatives in different European HEIs [18]. The main reasons are the lack of understanding of key BI concepts and obstacles in locating the right set of experts in each institution that could correctly and informedly answer the many diverse questions of the MM. This result led to the decision in 2019 to development of a new maturity model specific to the assessment of BIA systems in HE. The new MM is the outcome of a research project conducted by two BIA professors in collaboration with the BI Special Interest Group (BI SIG) of EUNIS-the European University Information Systems organization, a non-profit organization aiming at developing the IT landscape of HEIs through collaboration and networking [19]. The end goal of this project is to conduct a European-level survey on the maturity level of BIA systems in Higher Education. The previous study conducted by the EUNIS BI SIG was inconclusive [18]. Therefore, this research project was launched with the purpose of designing a new MM, driven by the existing knowledge published in the literature, and reflecting the needs and vocabulary of HE practitioners represented in the EUNIS BI-SIG. Specifically, five requirements encompass the research design of this project, which led to the decision to design a new BI maturity model, as opposed to using an existing one. * (R1): The model should enable each HEI to conduct a self-assessment exercise;
* (R2): It should be a domain-specific model, easy to understand and use relevant terminology for HE;
* (R3): The model should use a lean approach, i.e., enabling a high-level assessment that can be achieved with few resources (people and time) as opposed to providing an extensive list of questions;
* (R4): The model should capture new analytical aspects, such as the use of AI and Big Data, Internet of Things and 5G, that will be increasingly more relevant in the campus of the future. Many MM usually cited in the literature are now outdated, considering the complexity and novelty of current BIA solutions;
* (R5): The model should be designed following a research methodology in order to ensure a scientific and rigorous approach. This paper presents the HE-BIA maturity model version 2.0 that enables Higher Education Institutions to perform a lean self-assessment of their BIA solutions. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. We start discussing the related work in terms of existing BIA maturity models, followed by the description of the research design. The next section presents a step-by-step description of the design science research approach. Then, we present the research artifacts, the HE-BIA maturity model v2.0 and the assessment model. In the following section, we discuss the evaluation phase and the feedback received. The final section presents conclusions and avenues for future work.