MODULE 5 OF 6

The ATIS Maturity Model

From reactive firefighting to strategic organizational resilience.

5.1 Why Maturity Matters

The quantitative analysis of 1,392 analytical units reveals a consistent pattern: organizations at different levels of maturity respond differently to the four AI specificities.

464
ACT Instances
233
TRAIN Instances
339
INQUIRE Instances
252
STANDARDIZE Instances
"Yes, there are cases more [cultural] conflict creates problems, no choice, pushing your deadline, end up sacrificing features."
— P9, on reactive firefighting

The ATIS Maturity Model provides a roadmap for moving from this reactive state to strategic resilience.

5.2 The Pillar Saturation Ratio (PSR)

The PSR is a diagnostic metric that quantifies your organization's maturity across the four pillars.

SP = (∑cs / ∑ct) × 100%

Where:

Example Calculation:

If a pillar has 10 total criteria and your organization satisfies 7 of them:

SP = (7/10) × 100% = 70%

Your assessment results will automatically calculate your PSR for each pillar.

5.3 Level 1: The Reactive Stage (Act-Centric)

L1
🔥 Reactive • Act-Centric

Profile: High ACT (>70%), low STANDARDIZE and TRAIN (<30%)

Co-occurrence: 170.8% link between Stochastic Uncertainty and ACT

PSR Profile:

Characteristics

  • "Hero-Dependent": Success relies on individual effort rather than systemic governance
  • Firefighting culture: Managers constantly putting out technical and cultural fires
  • No standardization: Quick fixes are never documented or institutionalized
  • Burnout risk: Key individuals "staying up until 4:00 AM to fix broken code"
"We have to work on very fast timelines, so solving larger problem was more important than solving the small problem. Like if it's good enough, let's integrate it. Let's scale it."
— P17, describing reactive mode

The Firefighting Gap

Level 1 organizations show a nearly 2:1 ratio between ACT and STANDARDIZE. They are trapped in a cycle of "innovative quick fixes" that never become repeatable processes.

5.4 Level 2: The Mediated Stage (Inquiry-Balanced)

L2
⚖️ Mediated • Inquiry-Balanced

Profile: High INQUIRE (>70%), but STANDARDIZE remains <50%

Co-occurrence: 128.0% link between High Customer Expectations and INQUIRE

PSR Profile:

Characteristics

  • Recognized the "AI knows all" perception: Organizations actively recalibrate stakeholder dreams
  • Good communication: Improved stakeholder dialogue and expectation management
  • Still vulnerable: Lack of standardization means projects remain exposed to autocatalysis velocity
  • Reactive inquiry: Education happens after disillusionment, not before
"Client would come from his head and be like I need this and then you have to lower his dreams and use maps and graphs to show what's possible."
— P32, on expectation calibration

The Expectation Calibration Gap

While INQUIRE is strong, it's deployed defensively. Management labor is concentrated on "re-education" after stakeholder disillusionment rather than proactive alignment during design.

5.5 Level 3: The Strategic Stage (Standardized-Resilient)

L3
🛡️ Strategic • Standardized-Resilient

Profile: Balanced high saturation across all four pillars (>70%)

Target State: "Professional Insulation" achieved

PSR Profile:

Characteristics

  • Balanced application: All four pillars working in harmony
  • Proactive circuit breakers: Standardization and training neutralize friction at source
  • Systemic resilience: Organization survives loss of key individuals
  • Knowledge institutionalized: Quick fixes become documented procedures
"One thing I did was writing extensive documentation... close to 1500 or 1800 lines of code collectively... and I wrote close to 50 pages."
— P17, on standardization

Professional Insulation

Level 3 organizations create "Professional Insulation"—socio-technical shielding that prevents technical and cultural friction from disrupting the project baseline.

5.6 Visualizing Maturity: The Radar Chart

ATIS Maturity Model: PSR Profiles

ACT TRAIN INQUIRE STANDARDIZE INQUIRE TRAIN
Level 1: Reactive
Level 2: Mediated
Level 3: Strategic

The radar chart shows how organizations evolve from a narrow, ACT-focused profile (Level 1) to a balanced, resilient profile (Level 3).

5.7 The Three Managerial Gaps

Gap Description ATIS Response
Firefighting Gap 2:1 ratio between ACT and STANDARDIZE (464 vs 252) Institutionalize quick fixes into SOPs
Skilling Void TRAIN least utilized (16.7%) despite autocatalysis Continuous socio-technical training
Expectation Calibration Gap INQUIRE reactive (128.0% with expectations) Front-load inquiry to design phase
"The system is not followed then, you know you have a people problem... if the people are OK and still things are not going well, then is a system problem."
— P28, on diagnosing gaps

5.8 Resilience Buffers: The Circuit Breakers

The research identified 279 negative cases where technical triggers did NOT lead to friction. These reveal two critical resilience mechanisms that characterize Level 3 organizations:

🛡️ Professional Insulation

Strong professional IT norms act as a buffer against Process Disruption. Strict protocols and "ground rules" bypass latent cultural resistance.

"We are aligned on data privacy because we understand this is other people's data."
— P34

🏗️ Architectural Simplicity

Strategic architectural choices (e.g., RAG frameworks) bound probabilistic variance within a verifiable environment.

"We need this responsibility of building the model."
— P2

📌 Module 5 Key Takeaways

🔗 Your Turn: Calculate Your Maturity Level

The ATIS Self-Assessment will calculate your PSR for each pillar and determine your maturity level:

Your Results Will Show:

  • ACT PSR: ___% — Your level of proactive intervention
  • TRAIN PSR: ___% — Your investment in continuous up-skilling
  • INQUIRE PSR: ___% — Your information acquisition practices
  • STANDARDIZE PSR: ___% — Your methodological stability
  • Maturity Level: Level 1, 2, or 3 with customized recommendations
→ Take the Assessment Now

✍️ Maturity Mapping Exercise

Before taking the assessment, estimate your organization's current state:

  1. On a scale of 0-100%, how much do you rely on individual "heroes" vs. systems?
  2. When was your last cross-cultural training? Is it one-time or continuous?
  3. Do you proactively probe client expectations, or only react when problems arise?
  4. Are your project "quick fixes" documented and turned into standard procedures?

Compare your estimates with your actual PSR scores after taking the assessment.