aiox-core 5.0.3 → 5.0.4

package/pro/squads/design/tasks/designops-maturity-assessment.md

@@ -1,364 +1,364 @@
-# designops-maturity-assessment
-
-> Assess organization's DesignOps maturity level using Dave Malouf's Three Lenses framework and 5-level maturity model.
-
-## Overview
-
-This task provides a comprehensive assessment of an organization's DesignOps maturity across the Three Lenses: How We Work, How We Grow, How We Thrive. The output is a scored assessment with gap analysis and prioritized recommendations.
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- Access to design team members for interviews/surveys
-- Understanding of current organizational structure
-- Stakeholder availability for context gathering
-
-## Malouf Framework Reference
-
-### Three Lenses of DesignOps
-1. **How We Work** - Workflow, tools, processes, collaboration
-2. **How We Grow** - Hiring, onboarding, career development, learning
-3. **How We Thrive** - Culture, community, well-being, advocacy
-
-### Maturity Levels
-| Level | Name | Description |
-|-------|------|-------------|
-| 1 | Ad Hoc | No formal DesignOps - reactive and individual |
-| 2 | Emerging | Basic standardization beginning - some awareness |
-| 3 | Defined | Clear processes and standards - adoption growing |
-| 4 | Managed | Metrics-driven optimization - continuous improvement |
-| 5 | Optimized | Industry-leading - innovation and excellence |
-
-## Task Steps
-
-### Phase 1: Discovery (Diagnostic)
-
-```yaml
-step: 1
-name: "Stakeholder Mapping"
-actions:
-  - Identify key stakeholders (design leadership, designers, cross-functional partners)
-  - Schedule interviews or distribute surveys
-  - Gather existing documentation (processes, tools, org charts)
-questions:
-  - "Who are the decision-makers for design operations?"
-  - "What documentation exists about current processes?"
-  - "Who can provide candid feedback about pain points?"
-```
-
-```yaml
-step: 2
-name: "Current State Discovery"
-actions:
-  - Interview 3-5 designers at different levels
-  - Interview design leadership
-  - Interview cross-functional partners (PM, Eng)
-  - Review existing tools and processes
-diagnostic_questions:
-  how_we_work:
-    - "What tools do you use for design? Is everyone using the same tools?"
-    - "How do projects flow from brief to delivery?"
-    - "How do design reviews happen? How often?"
-    - "What's your handoff process to development?"
-    - "Where do you store design assets?"
-  how_we_grow:
-    - "How were you hired? What was the interview process?"
-    - "What was your onboarding experience like?"
-    - "Is there a career ladder? Do you know how to progress?"
-    - "What learning opportunities exist?"
-  how_we_thrive:
-    - "Do you feel part of a design community?"
-    - "How is good work recognized?"
-    - "How's your workload? Any burnout concerns?"
-    - "Does design have influence on product decisions?"
-```
-
-### Phase 2: Assessment Scoring
-
-```yaml
-step: 3
-name: "Score Each Lens"
-template: |
-  ## HOW WE WORK Assessment
-
-  ### Workflow Management
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Design sprints/rituals defined
-  - [ ] Project intake process exists
-  - [ ] Review cycles documented
-  - [ ] Version control for design
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  ### Tooling
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Standard design tool adopted (>80%)
-  - [ ] Prototyping tools defined
-  - [ ] Collaboration tools standardized
-  - [ ] Design-dev integration tools
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  ### Asset Management
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Component library exists
-  - [ ] Icon system managed
-  - [ ] Brand assets centralized
-  - [ ] Naming conventions defined
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  ### Cross-Functional Collaboration
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Design-dev handoff process
-  - [ ] PM-design alignment rituals
-  - [ ] Research integration
-  - [ ] QA involvement
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  **Subtotal How We Work: [average]/5**
-
-  ---
-
-  ## HOW WE GROW Assessment
-
-  ### Hiring
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Recruiting pipeline defined
-  - [ ] Interview process documented
-  - [ ] Portfolio review rubric exists
-  - [ ] Diversity considerations
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  ### Onboarding
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] 90-day program exists
-  - [ ] Buddy/mentor assigned
-  - [ ] Tool training provided
-  - [ ] First project guidance
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  ### Career Development
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Career ladder defined
-  - [ ] Skills matrix exists
-  - [ ] Performance reviews structured
-  - [ ] IC and management tracks
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  ### Learning
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Training programs exist
-  - [ ] Conference budget allocated
-  - [ ] Skill sharing sessions
-  - [ ] External courses supported
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  **Subtotal How We Grow: [average]/5**
-
-  ---
-
-  ## HOW WE THRIVE Assessment
-
-  ### Culture
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Design values articulated
-  - [ ] Psychological safety present
-  - [ ] Feedback culture healthy
-  - [ ] Recognition systematic
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  ### Community
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Design critiques regular
-  - [ ] Show and tell sessions
-  - [ ] Design guild/community exists
-  - [ ] Cross-team connections
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  ### Well-being
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Workload managed
-  - [ ] Work-life balance supported
-  - [ ] Mental health resources
-  - [ ] Burnout prevention
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  ### Advocacy
-  Score: [1-5]
-  Evidence:
-  - [ ] Design leadership visible
-  - [ ] Executive sponsorship
-  - [ ] Design influences strategy
-  - [ ] Seat at the table
-  Notes: [observations]
-
-  **Subtotal How We Thrive: [average]/5**
-```
-
-### Phase 3: Gap Analysis
-
-```yaml
-step: 4
-name: "Calculate Overall Maturity"
-calculation: |
-  OVERALL MATURITY = (How We Work + How We Grow + How We Thrive) / 3
-
-  Interpretation:
-  1.0 - 1.5 = Level 1 (Ad Hoc)
-  1.6 - 2.5 = Level 2 (Emerging)
-  2.6 - 3.5 = Level 3 (Defined)
-  3.6 - 4.5 = Level 4 (Managed)
-  4.6 - 5.0 = Level 5 (Optimized)
-```
-
-```yaml
-step: 5
-name: "Identify Gaps"
-actions:
-  - Compare current state to target state
-  - Identify highest-impact gaps
-  - Prioritize by effort vs impact
-prioritization_matrix: |
-  | Gap | Impact (1-5) | Effort (1-5) | Priority |
-  |-----|--------------|--------------|----------|
-  | [gap 1] | [X] | [Y] | [High/Med/Low] |
-  | [gap 2] | [X] | [Y] | [High/Med/Low] |
-
-  Priority Rule:
-  - High Impact + Low Effort = Quick Win (do first)
-  - High Impact + High Effort = Strategic (plan carefully)
-  - Low Impact + Low Effort = Nice to have
-  - Low Impact + High Effort = Avoid
-```
-
-### Phase 4: Recommendations
-
-```yaml
-step: 6
-name: "Generate Recommendations"
-output_structure: |
-  ## DESIGNOPS MATURITY ASSESSMENT REPORT
-
-  Organization: [Name]
-  Assessment Date: [Date]
-  Assessor: Dave Malouf Framework
-
-  ---
-
-  ### Executive Summary
-
-  **Current Maturity Level: [X]/5 ([Level Name])**
-
-  | Lens | Score | Status |
-  |------|-------|--------|
-  | How We Work | [X]/5 | [Level] |
-  | How We Grow | [X]/5 | [Level] |
-  | How We Thrive | [X]/5 | [Level] |
-
-  **Key Finding:** [One sentence summary of biggest gap]
-
-  ---
-
-  ### Detailed Findings
-
-  [Lens-by-lens breakdown with evidence]
-
-  ---
-
-  ### Top 3 Priority Recommendations
-
-  1. **[Recommendation 1]** (Quick Win)
-     - Gap addressed: [X]
-     - Expected impact: [X]
-     - Timeline: [X weeks/months]
-
-  2. **[Recommendation 2]** (Quick Win or Strategic)
-     - Gap addressed: [X]
-     - Expected impact: [X]
-     - Timeline: [X weeks/months]
-
-  3. **[Recommendation 3]** (Strategic)
-     - Gap addressed: [X]
-     - Expected impact: [X]
-     - Timeline: [X weeks/months]
-
-  ---
-
-  ### 12-Month Roadmap
-
-  **Q1:** [Focus areas]
-  **Q2:** [Focus areas]
-  **Q3:** [Focus areas]
-  **Q4:** [Focus areas]
-
-  ---
-
-  ### Success Metrics
-
-  | Metric | Current | Target | Timeline |
-  |--------|---------|--------|----------|
-  | Overall Maturity | [X] | [Y] | [Z months] |
-  | [Specific metric] | [X] | [Y] | [Z months] |
-
-  ---
-
-  > "You can't skip maturity levels - organizations evolve in stages."
-  > - Dave Malouf
-```
-
-## Malouf Principles Applied
-
-- **"Where is the friction? That's where we start."** - Focus diagnostic on pain points
-- **"You can't skip maturity levels"** - Recommend incremental improvements only
-- **"Measure before optimizing"** - Establish baselines before proposing changes
-- **"Operations enable creativity"** - Frame recommendations as friction removal
-- **"Three Lenses"** - Always assess all three dimensions
-
-## Output Artifacts
-
-1. **Maturity Assessment Report** (comprehensive document)
-2. **Gap Analysis Matrix** (prioritized list)
-3. **Roadmap** (quarterly plan)
-4. **Success Metrics Dashboard** (tracking template)
-
-## Next Steps After Assessment
-
-- If maturity < 2: Focus on documenting current practices
-- If maturity 2-3: Build formal processes and governance
-- If maturity 3-4: Implement metrics and optimize
-- If maturity > 4: Focus on innovation and industry leadership
-
-## Related Tasks
-
-- `design-team-scaling.md` - Use after assessing "How We Grow"
-- `design-tooling-audit.md` - Deep dive on tooling gaps
-- `design-process-optimization.md` - Address workflow gaps
-- `designops-metrics-setup.md` - Implement measurement systems
-
-## Checklist Reference
-
-Use `checklists/designops-maturity-checklist.md` for detailed criteria at each level.
-
-
-## Related Checklists
-
-- `squads/design/checklists/designops-maturity-checklist.md`
-- `squads/design/checklists/design-team-health-checklist.md`
-
-## Process Guards
-- **Execution Type:** `Hybrid`
-- **Dependencies:** depends_on: `[]` · enables: `[]` · workflow: `design-system`
-- **On Fail:** Stop execution, capture evidence, and return remediation steps before proceeding.
-
-## Success Criteria
-- [ ] Output artifact(s) generated and referenced.
-- [ ] Validation checks executed with evidence.
-- [ ] Next-step dependencies documented.
+# designops-maturity-assessment
+
+> Assess organization's DesignOps maturity level using Dave Malouf's Three Lenses framework and 5-level maturity model.
+
+## Overview
+
+This task provides a comprehensive assessment of an organization's DesignOps maturity across the Three Lenses: How We Work, How We Grow, How We Thrive. The output is a scored assessment with gap analysis and prioritized recommendations.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+- Access to design team members for interviews/surveys
+- Understanding of current organizational structure
+- Stakeholder availability for context gathering
+
+## Malouf Framework Reference
+
+### Three Lenses of DesignOps
+1. **How We Work** - Workflow, tools, processes, collaboration
+2. **How We Grow** - Hiring, onboarding, career development, learning
+3. **How We Thrive** - Culture, community, well-being, advocacy
+
+### Maturity Levels
+| Level | Name | Description |
+|-------|------|-------------|
+| 1 | Ad Hoc | No formal DesignOps - reactive and individual |
+| 2 | Emerging | Basic standardization beginning - some awareness |
+| 3 | Defined | Clear processes and standards - adoption growing |
+| 4 | Managed | Metrics-driven optimization - continuous improvement |
+| 5 | Optimized | Industry-leading - innovation and excellence |
+
+## Task Steps
+
+### Phase 1: Discovery (Diagnostic)
+
+```yaml
+step: 1
+name: "Stakeholder Mapping"
+actions:
+  - Identify key stakeholders (design leadership, designers, cross-functional partners)
+  - Schedule interviews or distribute surveys
+  - Gather existing documentation (processes, tools, org charts)
+questions:
+  - "Who are the decision-makers for design operations?"
+  - "What documentation exists about current processes?"
+  - "Who can provide candid feedback about pain points?"
+```
+
+```yaml
+step: 2
+name: "Current State Discovery"
+actions:
+  - Interview 3-5 designers at different levels
+  - Interview design leadership
+  - Interview cross-functional partners (PM, Eng)
+  - Review existing tools and processes
+diagnostic_questions:
+  how_we_work:
+    - "What tools do you use for design? Is everyone using the same tools?"
+    - "How do projects flow from brief to delivery?"
+    - "How do design reviews happen? How often?"
+    - "What's your handoff process to development?"
+    - "Where do you store design assets?"
+  how_we_grow:
+    - "How were you hired? What was the interview process?"
+    - "What was your onboarding experience like?"
+    - "Is there a career ladder? Do you know how to progress?"
+    - "What learning opportunities exist?"
+  how_we_thrive:
+    - "Do you feel part of a design community?"
+    - "How is good work recognized?"
+    - "How's your workload? Any burnout concerns?"
+    - "Does design have influence on product decisions?"
+```
+
+### Phase 2: Assessment Scoring
+
+```yaml
+step: 3
+name: "Score Each Lens"
+template: |
+  ## HOW WE WORK Assessment
+
+  ### Workflow Management
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Design sprints/rituals defined
+  - [ ] Project intake process exists
+  - [ ] Review cycles documented
+  - [ ] Version control for design
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  ### Tooling
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Standard design tool adopted (>80%)
+  - [ ] Prototyping tools defined
+  - [ ] Collaboration tools standardized
+  - [ ] Design-dev integration tools
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  ### Asset Management
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Component library exists
+  - [ ] Icon system managed
+  - [ ] Brand assets centralized
+  - [ ] Naming conventions defined
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  ### Cross-Functional Collaboration
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Design-dev handoff process
+  - [ ] PM-design alignment rituals
+  - [ ] Research integration
+  - [ ] QA involvement
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  **Subtotal How We Work: [average]/5**
+
+  ---
+
+  ## HOW WE GROW Assessment
+
+  ### Hiring
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Recruiting pipeline defined
+  - [ ] Interview process documented
+  - [ ] Portfolio review rubric exists
+  - [ ] Diversity considerations
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  ### Onboarding
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] 90-day program exists
+  - [ ] Buddy/mentor assigned
+  - [ ] Tool training provided
+  - [ ] First project guidance
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  ### Career Development
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Career ladder defined
+  - [ ] Skills matrix exists
+  - [ ] Performance reviews structured
+  - [ ] IC and management tracks
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  ### Learning
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Training programs exist
+  - [ ] Conference budget allocated
+  - [ ] Skill sharing sessions
+  - [ ] External courses supported
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  **Subtotal How We Grow: [average]/5**
+
+  ---
+
+  ## HOW WE THRIVE Assessment
+
+  ### Culture
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Design values articulated
+  - [ ] Psychological safety present
+  - [ ] Feedback culture healthy
+  - [ ] Recognition systematic
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  ### Community
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Design critiques regular
+  - [ ] Show and tell sessions
+  - [ ] Design guild/community exists
+  - [ ] Cross-team connections
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  ### Well-being
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Workload managed
+  - [ ] Work-life balance supported
+  - [ ] Mental health resources
+  - [ ] Burnout prevention
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  ### Advocacy
+  Score: [1-5]
+  Evidence:
+  - [ ] Design leadership visible
+  - [ ] Executive sponsorship
+  - [ ] Design influences strategy
+  - [ ] Seat at the table
+  Notes: [observations]
+
+  **Subtotal How We Thrive: [average]/5**
+```
+
+### Phase 3: Gap Analysis
+
+```yaml
+step: 4
+name: "Calculate Overall Maturity"
+calculation: |
+  OVERALL MATURITY = (How We Work + How We Grow + How We Thrive) / 3
+
+  Interpretation:
+  1.0 - 1.5 = Level 1 (Ad Hoc)
+  1.6 - 2.5 = Level 2 (Emerging)
+  2.6 - 3.5 = Level 3 (Defined)
+  3.6 - 4.5 = Level 4 (Managed)
+  4.6 - 5.0 = Level 5 (Optimized)
+```
+
+```yaml
+step: 5
+name: "Identify Gaps"
+actions:
+  - Compare current state to target state
+  - Identify highest-impact gaps
+  - Prioritize by effort vs impact
+prioritization_matrix: |
+  | Gap | Impact (1-5) | Effort (1-5) | Priority |
+  |-----|--------------|--------------|----------|
+  | [gap 1] | [X] | [Y] | [High/Med/Low] |
+  | [gap 2] | [X] | [Y] | [High/Med/Low] |
+
+  Priority Rule:
+  - High Impact + Low Effort = Quick Win (do first)
+  - High Impact + High Effort = Strategic (plan carefully)
+  - Low Impact + Low Effort = Nice to have
+  - Low Impact + High Effort = Avoid
+```
+
+### Phase 4: Recommendations
+
+```yaml
+step: 6
+name: "Generate Recommendations"
+output_structure: |
+  ## DESIGNOPS MATURITY ASSESSMENT REPORT
+
+  Organization: [Name]
+  Assessment Date: [Date]
+  Assessor: Dave Malouf Framework
+
+  ---
+
+  ### Executive Summary
+
+  **Current Maturity Level: [X]/5 ([Level Name])**
+
+  | Lens | Score | Status |
+  |------|-------|--------|
+  | How We Work | [X]/5 | [Level] |
+  | How We Grow | [X]/5 | [Level] |
+  | How We Thrive | [X]/5 | [Level] |
+
+  **Key Finding:** [One sentence summary of biggest gap]
+
+  ---
+
+  ### Detailed Findings
+
+  [Lens-by-lens breakdown with evidence]
+
+  ---
+
+  ### Top 3 Priority Recommendations
+
+  1. **[Recommendation 1]** (Quick Win)
+     - Gap addressed: [X]
+     - Expected impact: [X]
+     - Timeline: [X weeks/months]
+
+  2. **[Recommendation 2]** (Quick Win or Strategic)
+     - Gap addressed: [X]
+     - Expected impact: [X]
+     - Timeline: [X weeks/months]
+
+  3. **[Recommendation 3]** (Strategic)
+     - Gap addressed: [X]
+     - Expected impact: [X]
+     - Timeline: [X weeks/months]
+
+  ---
+
+  ### 12-Month Roadmap
+
+  **Q1:** [Focus areas]
+  **Q2:** [Focus areas]
+  **Q3:** [Focus areas]
+  **Q4:** [Focus areas]
+
+  ---
+
+  ### Success Metrics
+
+  | Metric | Current | Target | Timeline |
+  |--------|---------|--------|----------|
+  | Overall Maturity | [X] | [Y] | [Z months] |
+  | [Specific metric] | [X] | [Y] | [Z months] |
+
+  ---
+
+  > "You can't skip maturity levels - organizations evolve in stages."
+  > - Dave Malouf
+```
+
+## Malouf Principles Applied
+
+- **"Where is the friction? That's where we start."** - Focus diagnostic on pain points
+- **"You can't skip maturity levels"** - Recommend incremental improvements only
+- **"Measure before optimizing"** - Establish baselines before proposing changes
+- **"Operations enable creativity"** - Frame recommendations as friction removal
+- **"Three Lenses"** - Always assess all three dimensions
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+1. **Maturity Assessment Report** (comprehensive document)
+2. **Gap Analysis Matrix** (prioritized list)
+3. **Roadmap** (quarterly plan)
+4. **Success Metrics Dashboard** (tracking template)
+
+## Next Steps After Assessment
+
+- If maturity < 2: Focus on documenting current practices
+- If maturity 2-3: Build formal processes and governance
+- If maturity 3-4: Implement metrics and optimize
+- If maturity > 4: Focus on innovation and industry leadership
+
+## Related Tasks
+
+- `design-team-scaling.md` - Use after assessing "How We Grow"
+- `design-tooling-audit.md` - Deep dive on tooling gaps
+- `design-process-optimization.md` - Address workflow gaps
+- `designops-metrics-setup.md` - Implement measurement systems
+
+## Checklist Reference
+
+Use `checklists/designops-maturity-checklist.md` for detailed criteria at each level.
+
+
+## Related Checklists
+
+- `squads/design/checklists/designops-maturity-checklist.md`
+- `squads/design/checklists/design-team-health-checklist.md`
+
+## Process Guards
+- **Execution Type:** `Hybrid`
+- **Dependencies:** depends_on: `[]` · enables: `[]` · workflow: `design-system`
+- **On Fail:** Stop execution, capture evidence, and return remediation steps before proceeding.
+
+## Success Criteria
+- [ ] Output artifact(s) generated and referenced.
+- [ ] Validation checks executed with evidence.
+- [ ] Next-step dependencies documented.