Paula_Werth_15710181_Final Year Project

A Maturity Model to Evaluate the
Engineering Capabilities of South
African Municipalities
Paula Werth
15710181
Final year project presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
of Bachelors of Industrial Engineering at Stellenbosch University
Study leader: Prof. C. S. L. Schutte
December 2012

Page i
Stellenbosch University Department of Industrial Engineering
Acknowledgements
Firstly, I would like to thank my study leaders, Prof C. S. L Schutte and Mr S. van Baalen, for their
guidance.
I would also like to thank Mr E. Delport for his time and general introduction of municipal
services and Mr A. van Niekerk, the Director of Engineering Services of the Stellenbosch
Municipality, for all of his time, knowledge and help with building the Maturity Model.
And finally, the support from my friends and family are much appreciated.

Page ii
Declaration
I, the undersigned, hereby declare that the work contained in this final year project is my own
original work and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it at any
university for a degree.
………………………….………….. ………………………….…………..
Paula Werth Date

Page iii
ECSA Exit Level Outcomes Reference
The following table include references to sections in this report where ECSA exit level outcomes
are addressed.
Table 1: ECSA level outcomes and motivation
Exit level outcome Section(s) Page(s) Motivation
1. Problem solving 1.2, 1.3,
4.2, 5.1,
5.2,5.2.3,
6.1, 6.2
8, 34,
43, 44,
51, 55,
56
Analyse and identify current problems
with regards to basic service delivery of
municipalities.
Identify and define problem areas and
an approach towards an acceptable
solution, such as using a maturity model
for the assessment.
Identify necessary information and the
applicable engineering for solving the
problem.
A possible approach for solving the
problem is generated and formulated in
the problem statement.
The possible solution is modelled and
analysed. The solution is formulated and
presented in an appropriate form such
as graphs, which display maturity levels.

Page iv
2. Engineering methods,
skills, tools and IT
1.4, 2.3,
4.2, 4.3, 5.2
9, 21,
34,39,
40, 44,
53
The ability to use engineering methods,
tools and skills is demonstrated
throughout the whole report.
Engineering tools such as flow charts,
VBA programming and maturity models
are used in this final year project. Basic
statistics techniques are also
incorporated into this study.
Computer software is used for
computation, information handling and
modelling.
Computers and networks are used for
accessing (internet sources), processing
(Excel and Word), managing and storing
(Dropbox), information.
3. Professional &
technical
communication
All All
Effective
This project is well structured and is
written in the appropriate style and
language. Effective graphical support is
used and the project aims at meeting the
requirements of the target group.
4. Independent learning
ability
1.1, 1.4, 2,
3, 5.2.3, 6
7, 9, 12,
22, 51,
55
The concept of maturity models was
previously unknown to the student. The
student independently reflected and
determined the learning requirements
and strategies in order to complete the
study.
The student also expanded her VBA

Page v
programming skills, by independently
researching how to apply it to building
the applicable user forms for this study.
5. Engineering
Professionalism
1.4, 2.4,
3.4, 4.4,
5.2.3, 6.2
9, 21,
31, 42,
52, 56
Engineering professionalism is
demonstrated by the student throughout
the entire project.
Student displays judgement during
decision making and limits it to current
area of competence.
Student accepts full responsibility for
the research project and knowledge is
accessed, comprehended and applied
outside formal instruction.

Page vi
Abstract
The purpose of this final year project is to build an assessment tool that measures the capability,
of the Engineering Department of Stellenbosch Municipality, to deliver basic services to its
community. The aim is to build an assessment tool with the potential to be adapted for other
engineering departments. This assessment tool is based on the concept of a maturity model.
The research explores the problems faced by municipalities in terms of backlogs and the
amount of protests correlating to the poor level of service delivery. It looks at the
responsibilities of the engineering departments within municipalities and the Service Delivery
Path which must be followed to supply the basic services.
The study introduces the concept of maturity models, which also explains five levels of maturity
and why maturity models are useful for measuring the maturity level of the Engineering
department of Stellenbosch Municipality.
The study also elaborates on the development of the model by referring to a framework of
development phases. Here the Service Delivery Approach integrates with the hierarchal
structure of the engineering department and develops applicable process areas for the
assessment of the engineering department. The levels of a maturity model are adapted to form
a roadmap for determining the maturity level of the applicable process areas. The study also
exemplifies an interactive assessment tool which is built in Excel.
The assessment tool is tested on the Engineering Department of Stellenbosch Municipality and
it scores an overall maturity level of 3, which means that processes are defined. This tool is
useful for assessing the maturity level of an engineering department and it has the potential to
be applied to any engineering department.

Page vii
Opsomming
Die doel van hierdie finalejaarprojek is om ŉ assesseringsinstrument te bou om die vermoë van
die Ingenieursdepartement van Stellenbosch Munisipaliteit, om basiese dienste te lewer, te
meet. Hierdie assesseringsinstrument is gebou met die potensiaal om ook bruikbaar te wees by
ander munisipaliteite. Hierdie assesseringsinstrument is gebaseer op die konsep van ŉ
volwassenheidsmodel.
Die navorsing ondersoek die belangrikste probleme wat deur munisipaliteite ondervind word.
Hierdie probleme is onder andere ŉ styging in die hoeveelheid optogte, aangesien die publiek
ontevrede is met die basiese dienslewering van munisipaliteite. Die ondersoek brei uit en
bepaal ook die verantwoordelikhede van ingenieursdepartemente. Die “Service Delivery Path”,
wat gevolg moet word om ŉ basiese diens te lewer, is ook bespreek.
Die konsep van ŉ volwassenheidsmodel is voorgestel en die vyf vlakke van volwassenheid,
asook die gebruik van die model is behandel.
Die ontwikkeling van die model is bespreek deur na die verskillende fases van die
ontwikkelingsraamwerk te verwys. Die “Service Delivery Path” is geïntegreer met die
hiërargiese struktuur van die ingenieursdepartement om die proses areas uit te lig wat
ondersoek moet word. Die verskeie vlakke van die volwassenheidsmodel is omskryf na ŉ
padkaart van vrae wat gevolg kan word om die volwassenheid vlak te bepaal van die toepaslike
proses area. In hierdie afdeling is die interaktiewe model, wat in Excel gebou is, ook bespreek.
Hierdie assesseringsinstrument is getoets by die Ingenieursdepartement van Stellenbosch
Munisipaliteit en die algehele vlak van volwassenheid is 3, wat beteken dat prosesse gedefinieer
is. Hierdie toepassing van ŉ volwassenheidsmodel is ŉ bruikbare instrument om die vlak van
volwassenheid te bepaal vir ŉ ingenieursdepartement. Hierdie model het ook die potensiaal om
tot enige ingenieursdepartement aangewend te word.

Page viii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ..........................................................................................................................................................i
Declaration..........................................................................................................................................................................ii
ECSA Exit Level Outcomes Reference .....................................................................................................................iii
Abstract ...............................................................................................................................................................................vi
Opsomming.......................................................................................................................................................................vii
Table of Contents..........................................................................................................................................................viii
List of Illustrations...........................................................................................................................................................x
List of Tables.....................................................................................................................................................................xii
1. Introduction..............................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background......................................................................................................................................................1
1.2 Problem statement .......................................................................................................................................2
1.3 Proposed solution.........................................................................................................................................2
1.4 Research methodology................................................................................................................................3
1.5 Document structure.....................................................................................................................................4
2. Municipalities in South Africa............................................................................................................................6
2.1 The current state of municipal service delivery...............................................................................6
2.2 The role and responsibilities of engineering departments within municipalities.......... 12
2.3 Levels of management and the Service Delivery Path approach............................................ 13
2.4 Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................................15
3. Maturity models ...................................................................................................................................................16
3.1 An introduction to maturity models................................................................................................... 16
3.2 The purpose of maturity models ......................................................................................................... 20

Page ix
3.3 Examples of maturity models ............................................................................................................... 21
3.4 Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................................25
4. Developing the assessment tool .................................................................................................................... 26
4.1 Designing the maturity model .............................................................................................................. 26
4.2 Building the maturity model ................................................................................................................. 28
4.3 Building the assessment tool in Excel................................................................................................ 36
4.4 Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................................38
5. Results......................................................................................................................................................................39
5.1 Method for obtaining results................................................................................................................. 39
5.2 Results.............................................................................................................................................................40
5.2.1 Results from Director of Engineering Services .................................................................... 40
5.2.2 Overall results from the Director, managers and heads................................................... 41
5.3 Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................................53
6. Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................................54
6.1 Reflecting on methodology .................................................................................................................... 54
6.2 Project Conclusion and future work................................................................................................... 55
6.3 Personal lessons learnt............................................................................................................................ 56
References........................................................................................................................................................................57
Appendix A: Updated project plan ......................................................................................................................... 61

Page x
List of Illustrations
Figure 1: The research methodology roadmap....................................................................................................3
Figure 2: Civil engineers in local government......................................................................................................7
Figure 3: English-speaking and Scandinavian versus South African municipalities............................9
Figure 4: Major service delivery protests by year (from 2004 up till the first quarter of 2012). 11
Figure 5: Engineering department hierarchy.................................................................................................... 13
Figure 6: Three levels of management ................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 7: Service Delivery Path................................................................................................................................ 15
Figure 8: CMM Levels...................................................................................................................................................17
Figure 9: Characteristics of the CMMI's maturity levels................................................................................ 18
Figure 10: Quality Control versus Quality Improvement.............................................................................. 19
Figure 11: Productivity and risk factor ................................................................................................................ 21
Figure 12: Cloud Maturity Model - measures maturity & adoption levels ............................................ 22
Figure 13: Interpretation of the Maturity Model.............................................................................................. 23
Figure 14: Spider graph displaying current maturity and current adoption ....................................... 24
Figure 15: The DataFlux Data Governance Maturity Model ........................................................................ 25
Figure 16: Development phases.............................................................................................................................. 26
Figure 17: Roadmap of questions to determine maturity level ................................................................. 35
Figure 18: An example of a questionnaire's user form.................................................................................. 37
Figure 19: Example of displayed result................................................................................................................ 37
Figure 20: The maturity level of each department (results from Director).......................................... 41
Figure 21: The maturity level of each department (results from all of the questionnaires) ......... 43
Figure 22: Graph for results of Transport, roads and stormwater........................................................... 47

Page xi
Figure 23: Graph for results of Water and sewer reticulation.................................................................... 48
Figure 24: Graph for results of Solid waste management ............................................................................ 49
Figure 25: Graph for results of Electrical Services .......................................................................................... 51
Figure 26: Graph for results of Admin.................................................................................................................. 52

Page xii
List of Tables
Table 1: ECSA level outcomes and motivation....................................................................................................iii
Table 2: Methodology Chapter Cross-reference..................................................................................................5
Table 3: Civil professionals employed in all levels of local government, April 2005...........................8
Table 4: Age distribution of civil professionals in local government, April 2005..................................8
Table 5: Households’ access to basic service ..................................................................................................... 10
Table 6: Design decisions........................................................................................................................................... 27
Table 7: Branch processes......................................................................................................................................... 29
Table 8: The results for maturity levels of each branch; obtained from the Director of
Engineering Services....................................................................................................................................................40
Table 9: The results for maturity levels of each branch; obtained from all of the questionnaires.
...............................................................................................................................................................................................42
Table 10: Maturity results per question area .................................................................................................... 44
Table 11: Maturity level results per process area for Management......................................................... 45
Table 12: Maturity level results per process area for Admin...................................................................... 45
Table 13: Results for Transport, roads and stormwater............................................................................... 46
Table 14: Results for Water and sewer reticulation ....................................................................................... 48
Table 15: Results for Solid waste management................................................................................................ 49
Table 16: Results for Electrical services .............................................................................................................. 50
Table 17: Results for Admin...................................................................................................................................... 52

1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Municipalities play an important role in the daily lives of society. Municipalities are responsible
for the delivery of basic services, such as roads, water, sanitation and refuse removal, in order to
satisfy the basic needs of a society. Although most South Africans take these services for
granted, not all of the communities in South Africa are supplied with such basic services. In the
past few years there have been many protests, some even violent, concerning this problem
(Majoe, 2010). Most of these protests were regarding the poor quality (or the lack of) water
supply, electricity supply and roads (Yende, 2012).
At the South African Local Government Association’s special national conference (held in
Midrand on 10 September 2012), President Jacob Zuma stated that the main cause of poor
service delivery and the amount of backlogs originates from apartheid (Presidency, 2012). The
reason for this is that prior to 1994, most black citizens had to live in rural areas where almost
no form of local government was present and no economic or social viability were ensured for
these communities. According to the Presidency, “South Africa has gone through about three
centuries of colonialism and decades of apartheid, during which there was a systematic and
deliberate underdevelopment of the majority socially, economically and politically”
(Government Communication and Information System, 2012).
With the advent of democracy in 1994, a new strategy was established in order to empower
black people and to create a sense of equality among South African citizens. This also implied
that municipalities were restructured and that new policies were employed to enable the
delivering of the promises that were made during the 1994 election period (Lawless, Numbers
& Needs in local government, 2007). In line with the Millennium Development Goals, a Local
Government Turn Around Strategy (LGTAS) was developed to ensure that all households have
the minimum standard of each basic service by 2014. Although government was able to deliver
to some extent the promises made during the 1994 election, it still has not reached all of the

goals and therefore many citizens are still left without basic services (Cooperative Governance
& Traditional Affairs, 2009).
1.2 Problem statement
To deliver the required basic services to a community, a municipality must exhibit certain
capabilities. It is therefore necessary to determine what these required capabilities are and to
find a way of assessing those capabilities. By determining the maturity of those capabilities,
municipalities will know what their strengths and weaknesses are, which in turn should
facilitate the improvement of municipalities and the services they deliver. This implies that
municipalities use the knowledge gained by this assessment to improve neglected capabilities.
This final year project focus on developing a means of assessing the maturity of the capabilities
of municipalities, and will specifically focus on creating such an assessment for the Engineering
department of Stellenbosch Municipality. A successful result will demonstrate a means of
determining the level of maturity for the engineering department.
1.3 Proposed solution
The proposed solution is to build a tool which municipalities can use for assessing the maturity
level of the engineering department’s capabilities. This tool will be based on a maturity model
that is configured for engineering departments and will only focus on the basic services that a
municipality must deliver (as mentioned in Chapter 2).
This assessment tool will consist of a questionnaire, which will be completed by employees of
the engineering department. The acquired results will be represented by tables and graphs,
which will clearly state the maturity level of each domain.

1.4 Research methodology
The roadmap of the research methodology can be seen in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: The research methodology roadmap
This study begins by determining the current state of municipalities in South Africa. This is
important, because it highlights the problems which are faced by municipalities in terms of
service delivery and therefore establish the motives for doing this research study.
It is necessary to determine the capabilities that should be measured. In order to determine
these capabilities, more research is done to find out exactly how the engineering department
works and what the responsibilities of this department are. This is done through interviews
with employees within the engineering department and/or with further literature research.
Another important aspect of this final year project is the maturity model. Research is done to
establish what maturity models are, how they work and how it could be implemented in order
to build a model to measure the maturity of the engineering department’s capabilities.
The information gathered from the research about municipalities and maturity models are
integrated to design a model to measure the maturity level of each capability. Here it is
necessary to determine exactly which capabilities should be measured and how it will be
measured. After designing the maturity model, it is validated by the employees of the
engineering department.

The next step is to build the assessment tool. By using Visual Basic for Applications programming
in Excel, a macro-driven questionnaire is built. The macro-driven questionnaire is interactive
and is used for obtaining results. The term “macro-driven” refers to programming certain
functions into Excel to enable the use of objects (such as buttons or forms).
The results are acquired by collaborating with employees of the engineering department. This
collaboration is necessary since employees have knowledge of the status quo of the department,
but they need the knowledge of an expert who can explain how the maturity model, as well as
the actual tool, works.
Finally, the results are analysed to form a conclusion regarding the maturity level of the
engineering department and usefulness of the assessment tool.
1.5 Document structure
This section explains the structure of the document, and how that relates to the methodology
discussed in the previous section. The cross reference is shown in Table 2.
Chapter 2: Municipalities in South Africa
This chapter explores the responsibilities of municipalities and then gives an overview of
municipalities with regards to the quality of service delivery. The goal of this chapter is to
establish the need for improvement.
Chapter 3: Maturity models
This chapter introduces maturity models. The aim of this chapter is to describe what maturity
models are and why it can be useful for this research.
Chapter 4: Developing the assessment tool
This chapter first elaborates on the steps to be taken when designing a maturity model. These
steps are then incorporated into building a maturity model that is applicable for measuring the
maturity levels of engineering departments. The next section in this chapter then elaborates on
building the assessment tool.
Chapter 5: Results

This chapter represents the results that are obtained from the Engineering department of
Stellenbosch Municipality. It also includes the method for obtaining results and the analysis of
these results.
Chapter 6: Conclusion
The aim of this chapter is to summarise the outcomes of each chapter as well as the outcomes of
the research. Therefore, this chapter establishes whether the assessment tool is sufficient for
measuring the maturity levels of an engineering department.
Table 2: Methodology Chapter Cross-reference
Chapter1
Chapter2
Chapter3
Chapter4
Chapter5
Chapter6
Determine the responsibilities of engineering departments and
establish the current state of municipal services in South Africa
X X
Find out what maturity models are, how they work and how to
develop one
X X X
Design the model X X
Test the validity of the model X X
Build the assessment tool X X
Get results from engineering department employees X X
Analyse the results X X
Conclusion of results and usefulness of the assessment tool X X

2. Municipalities in South Africa
This chapter explores the current state of municipal service delivery and establishes whether
there is a need for improvement. This chapter also focuses on the structure within engineering
departments of municipalities and identifies the basic services for which it is responsible for.
Lastly, the chapter explains the three levels of management as well as the Service Delivery
Approach.
2.1 The current state of municipal service delivery
Engineering departments within municipalities are responsible for delivering basic services to a
community. Section 1 of the Municipal Finance Management Engineering Act, 2003 (Act 56 of
2003, MFMA) defines basic municipal services as a service that is necessary to ensure an
acceptable and reasonable quality of life and which, if not provided, would endanger public
health, safety and the environment.
The main focus of municipalities since 1994 has been on operations and non-income generating
residential infrastructure (Lawless, Numbers & Needs in local government, 2007). However,
local government neglected the service provision of
• maintenance;
• infrastructure to support commercial, industrial and economic development; and
• income generating residential infrastructure.
The need for civil engineers within municipalities has risen drastically since the restructuring
that happened in 1994, because municipal services was now required in rural areas as well.
Here rural areas refer to underdeveloped communities where previously disadvantaged people
live. However, the restructuring process was unaware of this effect and many engineering staff
left their job, retired early or got retrenched (Lawless, Numbers & Needs in local government,
2007). Unfortunately, the decay of employed engineers has continued. Restructuring is not the
only reason for the shortage of engineers; other reasons are budget constraints, increased
bureaucracy and pursuing equity targets (Lawless, Numbers & Needs, 2005). Figure 2 shows the
decaying trend of civil engineers employed at municipalities.

Figure 2: Civil engineers in local government
(Lawless, Numbers & Needs, 2005)
According to Lawless, 79 of 231 local municipalities had no civil engineers, technologists or
technicians in 2005. (Please note that there are now 234 municipalities). And four of the 47
district municipalities have no civil engineers, technologists or technicians. Forty-two of the
local municipalities and four of the district municipalities have only one civil technician. Then
38 out of the 231 local municipalities and 6 out of the 47 district municipalities only employ
technologists and technicians under the age of 35. This may pose a problem, since professionals
under the age of 35 has less experience than older staff. This also implies the loss of institutional
knowledge. There are a total of only 70 civil engineers employed at both local and district
municipalities, i.e. 45 at local municipalities and 25 at district municipalities (Lawless, Numbers
& Needs, 2005). Refer to Table 3 and Table 4 below for more detail about the levels of employed
civil professionals in local government as well as the age distribution of civil professionals
employed by local government.

Table 3: Civil professionals employed in all levels of local government, April 2005
(Lawless, Numbers & Needs, 2005)
Municipalities Engineers Technologists Technicians Total
District
municipalities
47 43 43 154 240
Local
municipalities
231 98 100 377 575
Metropolitan
municipalities
6 240 226 253 719
Total 284 381 369 784 1534
Table 4: Age distribution of civil professionals in local government, April 2005
(Lawless, Numbers & Needs in local government, 2007)
District Local Metropolitan Total
Total staff aged below 35 131 208 230 569
Staff aged 35 to 49 80 212 292 584
Staff aged 50+ 29 155 197 361
Total 240 575 719 1534
There is currently an average of less than three civil staff per 100 000 population (Lawless,
Numbers & Needs in local government, 2007). When comparing the number of civil staff per
100 000 population of South Africa with English-speaking and Scandinavian countries, the
result is striking (see Figure 3). These figures clearly show that there is an urgent need for more
civil engineers (especially those with experience) within engineering departments. It is possible
for municipalities to contract out, but expertise is still needed to determine the quality of the
project or service delivered.

Figure 3: English-speaking and Scandinavian versus South African municipalities
(Lawless, Numbers & Needs in local government, 2007)
The reduction in the staff capacity and the increase in the demand for service delivery, have led
to many critical problems. Some of these problems include (Lawless, Numbers & Needs in local
government, 2007):
• Lack of integrated planning and providing long-term infrastructure for growth
• Indiscriminate development due to a lack of town planning control, resulting in extra
drain on service for no additional income
• Lack of decision making
• Increase in health risks due to poor water quality and sewage spills
• Poor roads restrict access to health services, education and supplies
• Poor planning of housing developments
• The inability to manage service providers, resulting in poor quality solutions under- or
overpricing, overpayment and insufficient delivery, including projects being abandoned

• Loss of institutional knowledge
Table 5 contains information regarding the supply of water, sanitation, electricity and refuse
removal services to households. The amounts of backlogs in basic services are clearly
demonstrated by these figures, which highlights the critical state of service delivery in South
Africa.
Table 5: Households’ access to basic service
(Cooperative Governance & Traditional Affairs, 2009)
Access to
electricity for
lightning
Access to piped
water
Access to full &
intermediate
sanitation
Access to refuse
removal service
Western Cape –
94.0%
Western Cape –
98.9%
Western Cape –
93.4%
Western Cape –
91.1%
Northern Cape –
87.3%
Gauteng – 97.9% Gauteng – 87.8% Gauteng – 86.2%
Free State – 86.6% Free State – 97.5% North West – 81.6% Free State – 76.1%
Gauteng – 83.5% Northern Cape –
94.8%
Free State – 69.4% Northern Cape –
72.1%
North West – 82.3% North West – 89.9% South Africa – 67.6% South Africa – 61.6%
Mpumalanga –
81.7%
Mpumalanga – 91.3% KwaZulu-Natal –
63.9%
North West – 54.8%
Limpopo – 81.0% South Africa – 88.6% Northern Cape –
54.5%
KwaZulu-Natal –
51.9%
South Africa – 80.0% Limpopo – 83.6% Mpumalanga – 53.9% Mpumalanga – 41.5%
KwaZulu-Natal –
71.5%
KwaZulu-Natal –
79.4%
Eastern Cape – 48.9% Eastern Cape –
40.0%
Eastern Cape –
65.5%
Eastern Cape – 70.4% Limpopo – 30.8% Limpopo – 18.7%

When considering the amount of protest in the recent past, it is clear that previously
disadvantaged South Africans are not satisfied with service deliveries of municipalities. Figure 4
shows how the amount of protests has risen since 2004. There are many reasons for these
protests. According to Dr Johan Burger the main reasons for protests are the insufficient
delivery of municipal services such as running water, electricity and toilets (especially in
informal settlements). He also states that poor communities are unhappy about the high levels
of poverty, unemployment, poor infrastructure and the lack of houses. Protests arise from the
case where during election periods, voters are promised better living conditions once the new
government is in place. However when the new government is elected it does not live up to
these promises. Several protesters feel that this has been the case since the elections in 1994
(Burger, 2009).
Figure 4: Major service delivery protests by year (from 2004 up till the first quarter of 2012)
(Municipal IQ, 2012)
10
34
2
32
27
105
111
81
27
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Totalnumberofprotests
Year

2.2 The role and responsibilities of engineering departments within
municipalities
Local governments are responsible for the delivery of basic services that people need in their
communities. The most important services that should be provided by the engineering
departments are:
• Water supply
• Sewage collection and disposal
• Refuse removal
• Electricity supply
• Storm water systems
• Municipal roads
• Public transport
These services have a significant effect on the quality of living for the people of a community. If
these services are not delivered, it could lead to unhealthy and unsafe living environments. The
basic services required for urban regions can also be quite different to the services needed by
rural areas. (ETU, [s.a.])
In order to provide quality service to the public, it is necessary that an engineering department
should be well organised with a structure in place.
A typical engineering department consist of a director and a number of manager’s responsible
for their individual departments, who should supply all the necessary engineering services to a
community. There is no fixed structure by law which municipalities must follow, however the
structure of one engineering department is usually similar to other engineering departments.
This final year project will be focussing on the Engineering Department of Stellenbosch
Municipality. The structure of this department can be seen in Figure 5 below.

DIRECTOR: ENGINEERING
SERVICES
MANAGER:
WATER
SERVICES
MANAGER: SOLID
WASTE
MANAGEMENT
MANAGER:
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES & PROJECT
MANAGEMENT
MANAGER:
TRANSPORT,
ROADS AND
STORMWATER
MANAGER:
ELECTRICAL
SERVICES
SENIOR ADMIN
OFFICER: OFFICE
MANAGEMENT
PERSONAL ASSISTANT
Figure 5: Engineering department hierarchy
(Van Niekerk, Discussion of municiple structure and service delivery processes., 2012)
Water services are divided into
• water services operations and
• water- and wastewater treatment.
Water services operations refer to the sewer and water distribution network and infrastructure,
while the water- and wastewater treatment refers mostly to the treatment plant (Van Niekerk,
Discussion of municiple structure and service delivery processes., 2012).
Transport, roads and stormwater are divided into
• traffic engineering;
• roads and stormwater ; and
• transport planning and public transport.
The transport, roads and stormwater service area is responsible for providing the public with
mobility and access to desired locations. Roads are also an intrinsic part of the stormwater
drainage system, and needs to be planned carefully (Van Niekerk, Discussion of municiple
structure and service delivery processes., 2012).
Solid waste management refers to the collection of refuse, as well as the disposal thereof.
Electrical services refer to a stable network providing electricity to the community. Eskom and
municipalities collaborate to supply electrical services (Van Niekerk, Discussion of municiple
structure and service delivery processes., 2012).
2.3 Levels of management and the Service Delivery Path approach
A basic definition of a manager is someone who is responsible for some part of an organisation,
and therefore needs to make decisions that would potentially benefit the organisation.

Decisions for an organisation can be divided into three categories which are clearly displayed in
Figure 6 below. As seen in this figure, strategic decisions are focussed on policy decisions, which
are usually long term and complex. In the engineering department the Director of Engineering
Services would make these types of decisions. Tactical decisions would typically be made by the
managers of each branch, for example the manager of water services. Operational decisions
need to be made by the people who implement or operate processes such as the head of water-
and wastewater treatment or technicians (BBC, 2012).
Figure 6: Three levels of management
(BBC, 2012)
The Director of Engineering Services of Stellenbosch Municipality, Mr A. van Niekerk, suggests
using the Service Delivery Path Approach to deliver a product to the community – see Figure 7
below. “Product” refers to the service that needs to be delivered, which can be found in Section
2.2. The idea behind this approach is that in order to deliver a product, strategic decisions
regarding strategy and policy needs to be made first. These decisions consist of details such as
parameters, guidelines and objectives. After deciding on strategy and policy, tactical planning
needs to be done where decisions need to be made regarding the planning and design of the
product. This should include budgets and implementation plans. Following tactical planning,

operational decisions will govern the implementation, operation and maintenance of the
product. The Service Delivery Path should be monitored and reviewed regularly in order to
improve the final outcome (this can be done at any stage of the process e.g. at tactical planning)
(Van Niekerk, Discussion of municiple structure and service delivery processes., 2012).
Figure 7: Service Delivery Path
(Van Niekerk, High Level Service Delivery Process, 2003)
2.4 Conclusion
This chapter discussed the current state of municipal service delivery as well as the
responsibilities of engineering departments. It was found that there is not an adequate amount
of experienced civil staff employed by municipalities, which in turn causes backlogs and other
related problems. These problems make the living conditions of some South African citizens
unbearable which leads to an increasing number of protests each year. The amount of protests
regarding poor service delivery emphasise the critical need for a solution.
The responsibilities of an engineering department that were discussed in this chapter include
the supply of water, refuse removal, electricity, storm water systems, municipal roads, public
transport as well as sewage collection and disposal. Management levels and the Service Delivery
Path were also discussed in this chapter. This information will assist in designing the maturity
model.

3. Maturity models
This chapter introduces the concept of a maturity model, discuss the purpose of such a model
and illustrates examples of how a maturity model can be implemented in order to be useful for
this research project.
3.1 An introduction to maturity models
One of the first maturity models that were developed was the Capability Maturity Model (CMM).
The CMM originated from a request made by the Federal Government of the United States; it
required a method to objectively assess the capability of its software contractors. This request
lead to the development of a process maturity framework (done by the Software Engineering
Institute) that would guide organisations towards improving their software processes. This
framework was then used to develop the CMM (Paulk, Curtis, Chrissis, & Weber, 1993).
A Capability Maturity Model is “a five-stage method for developing and improving computer
programs or management processes in order to meet high standards” (Cambridge University,
[s.a.]).
A maturity model is divided into five sequential levels and it is suggested that an organisation
can only be on one level at a time. These levels “describe how well the behaviours, practices and
processes of an organization can reliably and sustainably produce required outcomes”
(Intecracy group, 2011).
The CMM developed by the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute consists of five
levels (Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute, 2012):
• Level 1 - The Initial Level
• Level 2 - The Repeatable Level
• Level 3 - The Defined Level
• Level 4 - The Managed Level
• Level 5 - The Optimising Level
The sequential maturity levels of the CMM are displayed below in Figure 8.

Figure 8: CMM Levels
(Anderson, 2007)
After developing the CMM, another maturity model called the Capability Maturity Model
Integration (CMMI) was developed. According to the Software Engineering Institute, “CMMI
(Capability Maturity Model Integration) is a process improvement approach that provides
organisations with the essential elements of effective processes, which will improve their
performance. CMMI-based process improvement includes identifying your organisation’s
process strengths and weaknesses and making process changes to turn weaknesses into
strengths” (Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute, 2012). This model also consist of
five maturity levels, with some of the levels correlating to the CMM. Figure 9 shows a
representation of all the levels as well as the meaning of each level (ISTQB Guide, [s.a.]).

Figure 9: Characteristics of the CMMI's maturity levels
(ISTQB Guide, [s.a.])
In general, at level 1 the organisation does not provide a stable environment and processes are
characterised as ad-hoc or even chaotic. In general, schedules, budgets, functionality, and
product quality are unpredictable. The performance of processes, and the overall organisation,
relies on the capabilities of individuals and varies with their instinctive skills, knowledge, and
motivations. (Paulk, Curtis, Chrissis, & Weber, 1993)
Level 2 represents an organisation with a controlled environment where processes are stable
and managed, but not standardised. Processes are often reactive and there is no consistency or
coordination among different groups. Requirements, processes, work products, and services are
managed at this level and products and services satisfy their specified requirements, standards,
and objectives (ISTQB Guide, [s.a.]).
The significant difference between maturity level 2 and maturity level 3 is that at level 3, the
standards, process descriptions and procedures are tailored to suit a particular project or
organizational unit. At this level processes are defined and also described to a much greater

extent, especially with regards to standards, procedures, tools, and methods. At maturity level 3
there is consistency from groups with regards to the execution of projects or processes (ISTQB
Guide, [s.a.]).
Level 4 focuses on measuring the quality and productivity of processes. Level 4 can be seen as
predictable, because the measurements are used to control processes or projects by keeping it
within acceptable bounds. It is therefore expected that the quality of processes or projects
should be high (Paulk, Curtis, Chrissis, & Weber, 1993).
If an organisation reaches maturity level 5, it means that level 1 up to level 4 has been reached
and that the organisation should now focus on continually improving process performance. The
main difference between maturity level 4 and maturity level 5 is that level 4 uses measurements
to apply quality control; whereas level 5 uses measurements to apply quality improvement.
Quality control is focussed on eliminating sporadic spikes in process data; whereas quality
improvement is focused on shifting the process mean, while maintaining statistical
predictability (ISTQB Guide, [s.a.]). Figure 10 visually displays the difference between quality
control and quality improvement as explained above.
Figure 10: Quality Control versus Quality Improvement
(Gryna, Chua, & DeFeo, 2007)

3.2 The purpose of maturity models
Maturity models are “used as an evaluative and comparative basis for improvement and in
order to derive an informed approach for increasing the capability of a specific area within an
organization” (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005, p. 2). Maturity models can
provide organisations with a good understanding of the current status of processes within the
organisation as well as a roadmap for moving forward (Intecracy group, 2011). This means that
maturity models can be used to identify the strengths and weaknesses of processes or
organisations, which will indicate possible areas of improvement. Maturity models also enable
people to establish where they agree or disagree on the level of maturity. This may be useful in
terms of getting the ‘whole picture’ and not just the opinion of one person. Maturity models can
also be used as a benchmarking tool that will enable an organisation to compare processes with
similar processes of other organisations or with best practices (Smit, 2005).
When designing a new maturity model, it is necessary to outline the sequential stages of the
model as well as to characterise each stage (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005).
This will give a framework to users for prioritising actions and it should also help the
organisation to clearly define what improvement means to the organisation (Intecracy group,
2011). The purpose for which a Maturity Model may be applied could be descriptive,
prescriptive or comparative in nature (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005).
A maturity model is considered to be descriptive if it is applied only to single point encounters
in which the model does not provide relationships to performance or indications of how to
improve the maturity. This type of model is good for assessing the as-is situation and can be
used as a diagnostic tool (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005).
A maturity model would provide a prescriptive purpose if it specifies how to recognize
desirable future maturity levels and also provides guidelines on how to approach maturity
improvement, thus suggesting a “specific and detailed courses of action” (Maier, Moultrie, &
Clarkson, 2009, p. 21).
A comparative model enables internal or external benchmarking (Röglinger, Pöppelbuß, &
Becker, 2012, p. 330). This entails benchmarking across regions or industries (De Bruin,
Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005).

It is assumed that the level of maturity indicates the productivity or risk factor (see Figure 11).
It is therefore useful to determine an organisation’s maturity level in order to establish the
degree of risk that is present. High maturity levels indicate a good productivity performance and
a lower risk factor.
Figure 11: Productivity and risk factor
(Champlin, 2003)
3.3 Examples of maturity models
More than 150 maturity models have been developed to measure, among others, the maturity of
IT Service Capability, Strategic Alignment, Innovation Management, Program Management,
Enterprise Architecture and Knowledge Management Maturity (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, &
Kulkarni, 2005). Some specific examples of maturity models are:
• Capability Maturity Model Integration (Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute,
2012)
• Risk Maturity Model (LogicManager, 2012)
• Project Management Maturity Model (Project Management Solutions, Inc., 2012)
• Information Maturity Model (Meta Group, [s.a.])
• Business Process Management Maturity Model (Marija Andjelkovic Pesic, [s.a.])

The following section illustrates some useful ways of representing maturity models.
Oracle has developed a Cloud Maturity Model. Figure 12, Figure 13 and Figure 14 display the
graphs that are used to visualise the maturity of the assessed organisations and companies. The
current state of an organisation or company can be determined by assessing the level of
maturity and the degree of adoption of individual capabilities. A good graphical way of
illustrating the level of maturity and degree of adoption can be displayed as seen in Figure 12.
The scale is from -1 to 5, where the 5 represents the highest level.
Figure 12: Cloud Maturity Model - measures maturity & adoption levels
(Oracle, 2011)
After plotting the maturity level and degree of adoption, it is easier to analyse the current state
of the organisation. In Figure 13 below the red circles indicate likely problem areas and the
green circle indicates a capability that is at a relatively high level of maturity, but which is ready
for wider adoption.

Figure 13: Interpretation of the Maturity Model
(Oracle, 2011)
Another good representation of a Maturity Model is a spider graph, as shown in Figure 14. On
this graph each ‘leg’ represents a capability that is measured. The best score that can be
achieved is 5. The key displays the items that are measured. This graph gives an excellent
display of the overall maturity and adoption and makes it easy to identify the lagging
capabilities. This graph can be useful when comparing current levels with the required levels or
the levels that are aimed for.

Figure 14: Spider graph displaying current maturity and current adoption
(Oracle, 2011)
The DataFlux Data Governance Maturity Model was developed by DataFlux to help
“organizations understand their current level of data management and identify a path for
growth in the future”. According to DataFlux, a unified enterprise view can be achieved by
following an “understood and established path” (DataFlux, 2012). The path is marked by four
distinct stages:
1. Undisciplined
2. Reactive
3. Proactive
4. Governed
Data Governance Maturity Model (Figure 15) helps to determine the current stage of a company,
and how and when to move to the next stage. Each level needs third-party technology
investments as well as investments from internal resources. As the company moves from the
one stage to the next, the reward increases and the risk decrease (DataFlux, 2012).

Figure 15: The DataFlux Data Governance Maturity Model
(DataFlux, [s.a.])
3.4 Conclusion
This chapter defined what a maturity model is and identified the five levels of a CMM model as
Initial, Repeatable, Defined, Managed and Optimising. This definition of a maturity model will be
used to develop the maturity model for this final year project.
The chapter also illustrated the usefulness of maturity models, especially in terms of
determining the strengths and weaknesses of processes. Another useful aspect of a maturity
model is the fact that it can incorporate more than one person’s “opinion” and then show how
well the “opinions” of all of the people correlate. The results obtained by the maturity model
may also provide a roadmap for the improvement of processes.
When developing the assessment tool (Chapter 4), some of the examples given in Section 3.3
can be used to display the results obtained for the engineering department.

4. Developing the assessment tool
Chapter 2 described the current state of municipalities and it was established that a form of
assessment is necessary to facilitate the improvement of processes. The basic services for which
an engineering department is responsible for was also identified in Chapter 2.
Chapter 3 focussed on maturity models and showed why it would be useful for assessing an
The next step on the research methodology roadmap (Chapter 1) is to design and validate the
maturity model and then to build the assessment tool based on this model.
Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 will now be integrated to help with the development and building of a
tool that can be used for assessing an engineering department, especially focussing on the
Engineering Department of Stellenbosch Municipality.
4.1 Designing the maturity model
When designing a maturity model, the initial model that would be developed is usually the
descriptive maturity model. This model would provide a better understanding of the as-is state
of the organisation. This model may then be developed further into a prescriptive model which
would provide a roadmap for improvement within organisations. And finally, in order for
maturity models to be comparative, it must be applied to a wide range of organisations in order
to attain enough data to achieve valid comparisons (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni,
2005). The framework of generic phases for designing a maturity model can be seen in Figure
16. These phases are sequential and some of the phases would be iterative.
Figure 16: Development phases
(De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005)
Scope Design Populate Test Deploy Maintain

Decisions made in the scoping phase are important, since it would have an impact on all of the
subsequent development phases. During this phase it is important to decide whether the
model’s focus should be domain specific or general. This step would determine the specificity
and extensibility of the model (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005).
During the design phase of the development framework, the architecture of the model is
designed. This design phase would incorporate decisions regarding criterion such as the
audience, the method of application, the driver of application, respondents, and the application
(De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005). Refer to Table 6 below for corresponding
characteristics of each decision.
Table 6: Design decisions
(De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005)
Criterion Characteristic
Audience Internal External
Executives, Management Auditors, Partners
Method of
Application
Self Assessment Third Party Assisted Certified Practitioner
Driver of
Application
Internal Requirement External
Requirement
Both
Respondents Management Staff Business Partners
Application 1 entity / 1 region Multiple entities /
single region
Multiple entities /
multiple regions
The design phase focuses particularly on the needs of the audience. “The needs of the intended
audience are reflected in why they seek to apply the model, how the model can be applied to
varying organizational structures, who needs to be involved in applying the model and what can
be achieved through application of the model” (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005,
p. 5).
In the population phase it is “necessary to identify what needs to be measured in the maturity
assessment and how this can be measured” (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005, p.

6). At this stage it would be necessary to look at the structure of the municipality, determine
which domains to measure and how it will be measured.
During the test phase, the model should be tested to determine whether it is valid and reliable.
This phase would probably be part of an iterative process where mistakes must be corrected to
obtain a valid and reliable model (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005).
Deploying the model would entail verifying the generalisation of the model, i.e. determining
whether this model could be applied to other municipalities (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, &
Kulkarni, 2005). This however is beyond the scope of this final year project.
The maintenance phase of the maturity model development framework refers to issues such as
updating the model or managing repositories in order to follow the development of the model
(De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni, 2005). This phase is also beyond the scope of this final
year project.
4.2 Building the maturity model
It is suggested that models may consist of three layers (De Bruin, Rosemann, Freeze, & Kulkarni,
2005):
• Layer 1: Domain – This assessment will be done by top management (i.e. the CEO).
• Layer 2: Domain component – This assessment is usually done middle management (e.g.
the executives).
• Layer 3: Domain sub-component – This assessment will be done by management and
staff.
In the case of the Engineering department of Stellenbosch Municipality, Layer 1 will be
concerning the department as a whole; Layer 2 will be with regards to individual branches and
thereby also processes of the department; and Layer 3 entails activities within processes itself.
This final year project will only focus on Layer 1 and Layer 2, but it would be suggested that a
master’s study can be done the expand the model further into Layer 3.
When considering which capabilities should be selected to determine the overall maturity of the
engineering department, the logical procedure would be to consider the hierarchal structure of
the municipality. Chapter 2 provides the hierarchal structure of the Engineering department of
the Stellenbosch Municipality as well as the Service Delivery Path (as seen in Figure 7) which is

suggested for delivering specified services. Using the Service Delivery Path as a guide and
applying it to the hierarchal structure of the engineering department, the following processes
for each branch were identified to cover the overall capabilities that should be measured. Table
7 lists each branch and the individual processes that will be evaluated for each branch. This
table also includes the motivation for the investigation of these processes. The overall main
motivation for investigating the following branches’ process capabilities is that municipalities
are obligated by law to provide these basic services to a specific measurable standard.
Table 7: Branch processes
Branch Process Motivation for investigation
Management 1. General Management
2. Financial Management
3. Human Resources
Management
4. Asset Management
General management plays an
important role in engineering
departments, especially in terms of
integrating the assets, human
resources and the financial aspects.
Financial management is important
for the support of a municipality; if a
municipality is capable of providing
a service, but the necessary funding
is not available, then the service
cannot be provided. The
management of human resources
and assets are also very important
for the delivery of services.
Water services –
Water and wastewater
treatment
(Questions with
regards to wastewater
treatment plants and
1. Planning budgets and
creating
implementation plans.
2. Planning, designing
and implementing of
new infrastructure to
enable service delivery
Planning budgets and creating
implementation plans are important
to provide the water-and-
wastewater treatment branch with
structure and a strategic plan for
moving forward. Here current
situations must be evaluated and

water purification.) (e.g. expansion of
treatment works).
3. Operational processes
regarding service
delivery (e.g. treatment
of water).
4. Maintenance of
infrastructure and
resources.
future plans must be constructed to
improve the situation.
It is important to have adequate
infrastructure for the treatment
plant, to effectively treat the water.
Adequate plants will in turn reduce
the risk of contaminated water. New
infrastructure will provide clean
water to a broader range of South
Africans.
Operational processes must be
efficient, so that citizens are
continuously provided with clean
water.
Treatment plants and resources
must be maintained, to guarantee
reliability in the supply of clean
water.
Water services –
Water and sewer
reticulation
creating
and implementing of
(e.g. expanding pipe
network).
regarding service
delivery and
Budgets must be in place to support
operational processes and
maintenance. A strategic plan is
important to establish areas for
improvement for water and sewer
reticulation and to clearly elaborate
on how to improve on the current
situation.
Infrastructure is a key aspect in the
reticulation of water and sewer.
Rural areas especially need
adequate infrastructure for the

maintenance of
infrastructure and
resources (e.g.
repairing broken
pipes).
provision of water and the removal
of sewage.
The maintenance of infrastructure
and operational processes must be
effective and efficient to provide a
sufficient degree of service delivery.
Solid waste
management
(Questions with
regards to waste
collection and disposal
facilities.)
creating
and implementing of
(e.g. new disposal
facilities).
regarding service
delivery (e.g. waste
collection or operation
of disposal facilities).
4. Maintenance of
infrastructure and
resources (e.g.
maintenance of
collection vehicles).
Planning budgets and creating
implementation plans are important
to guide the solid waste
management department towards
good levels of service delivery.
Opportunities for improvement
must be identified and acted upon.
Waste must be managed and
therefore an adequate infrastructure
must be in place to handle the waste
load of all citizens.
Operational processes for solid
waste management must be
consistent and effective, to maintain
healthy and safe living conditions.
The maintenance of infrastructure
and resources are therefore also
important, to prevent the system
from coming to a halt.
Transport, roads and
stormwater
creating
Budgeting and implementation
planning are especially important
for roads, since it is extremely
expensive to maintain roads and to

and implementing of
new infrastructure and
transport initiatives to
enable service
delivery. This includes
roads (and stormwater
systems), traffic
engineering and public
transport.
regarding service
delivery (e.g.
operations of traffic
signalisation).
4. Maintenance of
infrastructure and
resources (e.g. road
maintenance).
build new roads (according to the
Head of Roads and Stormwater for
the Engineering department of the
Stellenbosch Municipality). He states
that there is more time available for
planning, than that there is cash
available to actually implement all of
the plans and thus plans are
extremely thorough.
The population of Stellenbosch
grows continuously and it is
therefore necessary to expand the
infrastructure to accommodate
everyone.
Operational processes must provide
the community with easy access to
their jobs and other necessary
places, and therefore plays and
intricate role in the everyday lives of
citizens.
Infrastructures must be maintained
to continuously provide the
community with access to desired
locations.
Electrical services
(Only the distribution
of electricity).
creating
and implementing of
the electrical network
Budgets and implementation plans
are essential to provide employees
with a good structure and a
roadmap for moving forward.
Electricity has an incredible
influence on the living conditions of

to enable service
delivery.
regarding service
delivery (e.g. selling of
pre-paid electricity).
4. Maintenance of
infrastructure and
resources (e.g.
maintenance of the
distribution network).
individuals and therefore the
electrical network must also be
expanded to rural areas.
Electricity must be readily available;
hence the maintenance of the
electrical network as well as the
operational processes must be
excellent.
Admin 1. General
Administration
2. Financial
Administration
3. Human Resources
Administration
4. Liaison and
communication
In order for processes to run
smoothly, it is vital to have a good
administration system in place. One
of the important aspects is for
instance scheduling meetings.
Administration must enhance the
communication between citizens,
municipalities and departments.
It is essential to have good financial
administration, because the
engineering department is
responsible for the public’s money
and therefore needs to have a good
traceability of the money.
Human resources also play a key
role in the provision of service. An
engineering department must have
the appropriate people to apply the
required knowledge and skills to

provide all of the required basic
services.
Lastly, it is also important to have
good relations with the community
to gain an understanding of their
needs and the degree of satisfaction.
The maturity levels of this maturity model will be based on the same levels as for the CMM
described in the literature study section; i.e. the maturity levels for this model will be:
• Level 1 - The Initial Level
• Level 2 - The Repeatable Level
• Level 3 - The Defined Level
• Level 4 - The Managed Level
• Level 5 - The Optimising Level
After reviewing several documents describing the meaning of each maturity level, it was found
that the capability maturity level for each process (and subsequently each branch) of the
engineering department could be determined by answering the questions presented in this
roadmap shown in Figure 17 on the next page.

Figure 17: Roadmap of questions to determine maturity level

In order to determine the overall maturity of the engineering department, the maturity levels of
each branch must be evaluated. Within each branch specific processes will be assessed to
determine that specific process’s capability maturity level. Assuming that each process is
equally important (and therefore has the same ‘weight’), an average of the processes of each
branch will be taken and that would be seen as the maturity level of the branch. After
calculating the average maturity level of each branch, the overall maturity level of the
engineering department can also be determined by taking the average of all of the branches’
scores. This method also implies that all of the branches carry the same weight towards the
overall maturity level. Further studies may be performed to determine appropriate suggested
weights for each process and branch, but this is beyond the scope of this final year project.
After designing and building the maturity model, it is necessary to validate each process and
also the correlating questions. This will be done by discussing the model with the employees of
the engineering department. When this model’s validity is viewed as satisfactory the next step is
to build the assessment tool. This is discussed in the following section.
4.3 Building the assessment tool in Excel
Since the appropriate capabilities which must be assessed and the necessary questions for the
measurement of these capabilities are determined, the next step will be to build the model. Excel
is used for the purpose of building the interactive questionnaire, because it has a build-in
function where macro-driven forms can be built by using Visual Basic for Applications (VBA)
programming. Another advantage of using Excel is that it provides an easy way of analysing the
results.
The first step for creating a questionnaire will be to build a user form that would serve as the
interface for answering the questions as stated in Figure 17. VBA programming will be used to
build the user form, which also entails extra features that automatically records results onto the
Excel sheet. The user (i.e. the person answering the questionnaire) will be guided by answering
“yes” or “no” to a set of sequential questions. When initially opening the user form, only the first
question will be displaying. Depending on whether the user answers “yes” or “no”, either
• the next question will be displayed; or
• Excel will close the user form and a result will be displayed.

An example of the user form, that shows all of the questions, is shown on the next page in Figure
18.
Figure 18: An example of a questionnaire's user form.
An example of a result that will be displayed if the process is at level 5 is presented in Figure 19.
Figure 19: Example of displayed result

As soon as a result is obtained for a process, the value is recorded onto the Excel sheet. After
completing all of the questions for a specific section of the maturity model, a radar chart is
automatically plotted to display the results for that section. Note that “section” refers to a sheet
with all of the questions regarding to a branch within the engineering department (e.g.
“Management”).
When all of the sections are completed, the “Summary” sheet in Excel will display the average
for each section as well as the overall average. This page also displays the minimums and
maximums of each section. These values are displayed in a table as well as in a graph.
4.4 Conclusion
This chapter started by laying out the framework for developing a maturity model and
discussing what each step entails. The design of the model was then discussed by referring to
which processes should be measured and the motivation behind measuring these processes.
The next step was to actually build the tool that will be used for determining the maturity levels
of processes in addition to the overall maturity level for each branch.
By referring to the methodology described in Chapter 1, the next step is to obtain the results
from employees of the engineering department.

5. Results
After developing the assessment tool, it is necessary to obtain and examine the results of this
research. This chapter discusses how the results are obtained from employees of the
Engineering department of Stellenbosch Municipality. The obtained results are displayed in
Section 5.2 and discussed in Section 5.3 in order to form a general conclusion about the overall
maturity level of the engineering department.
5.1 Method for obtaining results
When the assessment tool is built in Excel, it is required to meet with the employees to get the
results. When meeting with the employees, it is necessary to give an introduction about what
the maturity of capabilities mean and why this study is done. It is important to explain each
question to the interviewee and to ensure that he/she has a clear understanding of what is
being assessed.
The difficult aspect of this assessment tool however, is the fact that only specific people with
sufficient knowledge of a specific branch can be asked to answer the questionnaire. It is
therefore necessary to make an appointment with all of the employees who are managers of
processes, or a head of a sub-branch.
Firstly, this task was quite difficult, because the Engineering department of Stellenbosch
Municipality only employs a small number of people compared to municipalities of bigger towns
and therefore only one or two (sometimes three) people are able to give knowledgeable
answers. Another problem relating to the small number of knowledgeable employees available,
is the fact that some employees were on holiday, or some positions were vacant at the time of
conducting the study. Only 10 employees were available to complete the survey.
Secondly, most of the employees follow a hectic schedule and scarcely has time to answer such
questionnaires. The implied problem is that if there is only a minimal amount of people
available to answer the questionnaire and all of them have chaotic schedules, the chances of
obtaining all of the required results are low. It is therefore important, in general, to work in

collaboration with a dedicated team, of which its members are aware of the role that they have
to play in the research.
5.2 Results
Due to the problem (discussed above in Section 5.1) of the lack of enough knowledgeable
candidates, only 10 people could complete the survey.
5.2.1 Results from Director of Engineering Services
The results obtained from the Director of Engineering Services will be shown first. Table 8
shows a summary of the maturity levels for each branch and the overall maturity level for the
Table 8: The results for maturity levels of each branch; obtained from the Director of Engineering Services
Rounded
average
Average Minimum Maximum
Management 3 2.75 1 4
Transport, roads and stormwater 3 3.25 3 4
Water services –Water and sewer reticulation 3 3.33 3 4
Water services –Water and wastewater
treatment 4 3.50 3 4
Solid waste management 3 3.25 3 4
Electrical Services 3 3.25 3 4
Admin 2 2.00 1 3
Engineering department 3 3.05 1 4
The overall score obtained from the Director of Engineering Services is 3.05, which can be
rounded to a maturity level 3. This means that processes are defined. Note that it is only the
Management and Admin branches which have a score lower than 3. The Engineering
department of Stellenbosch Municipality should focus on documenting standard procedures to
effectively manage these branches. The results are also displayed graphically in Figure 20,

which makes it easy to see which branches are above average (i.e. above the purple line). The
Admin branch has the lowest overall score, equal to 2. Water and wastewater treatment has the
highest overall score, equal to 3.5.
Figure 20: The maturity level of each department (results from Director)
5.2.2 Overall results from the Director, managers and heads
The overall result for the Engineering department of Stellenbosch Municipality is an average
maturity level of 3.05 with a standard deviation of 0.8, which is quite high. This means that with
a probability of 95%, the maturity level of a branch may be anywhere between 1.48 and 4.62. It
is interesting to note that the result of the Director of Engineering services and the overall result
for all of the questionnaires are the same (i.e. 3.05). This may not always be the case.
A score of 3.05 can be interpreted as a maturity level of 3, which means it is the Defined level of
the maturity model.
Table 9 and Figure 21 display a summary of the combined results. The following tables (Table
13, Table 14, Table 15, Table 16 and Table 17) display the results for each branch. The results of

each person that answered the questionnaire for that specific branch can easily be compared
with the results of others. These results displayed in the tables are then graphically represented
in Figure 22, Figure 23, Figure 24, Figure 25 and Figure 26. Displaying the results in such a
manner makes it easy to grasp the difference of opinions.
Table 9 below shows that Admin is the poorest branch, with an average of 1.67. This means that
processes barely meet the level 2 of maturity. This indicates that most processes happen on an
ad-hoc basis. Transport, roads and stormwater is the highest scoring branch. This score is
especially due to the fact that there are strict set standards, i.e. definite processes that must be
followed. A maturity level of 4 indicates that processes are managed. This means that processes
are standardised, documented and integrated into the engineering department. The
productivity and quality of output of these processes are also measured and analysed.
Table 9: The results for maturity levels of each branch; obtained from all of the questionnaires.
Rounded
average
Management 3 2.75 1 4
Transport, roads and stormwater 4 4.13 1 5
Water services –Water and sewer
reticulation
3 2.67 2 4
Water services –Water and wastewater
treatment
4 3.5 3 4
Solid waste management 4 4 3 5
Electrical Services 3 3 2 5
Admin 2 1.67 1 5
Engineering department 3 3.05 1 5

From Figure 21 (and Table 9) it can be seen that the branches with maturity levels below
average is (sorted by average maturity levels from lowest to highest):
• Admin
• Water services –Water and sewer reticulation
• Management
• Electrical Services
From Figure 21 (and Table 9) it can be seen that the branches with maturity levels above
average is (sorted by average maturity levels from lowest to highest):
• Water services –Water and wastewater treatment
• Solid waste management
• Transport, roads and stormwater
Figure 21: The maturity level of each department (results from all of the questionnaires)
Another way of viewing the results is by showing the averages, minimums and maximums for
each question relating to a process see Table 10. (Note that the “Management” and “Admin”

branches are excluded from these calculations, since the measured processes for these two
branches differ from the rest.) Displaying the overall results per question, relating to specific
processes, can be useful to determine which processes are neglected and may be improved.
Table 10: Maturity results per question area
Question 1: Planning budgets and creating
implementation plans
3.21 1.33 4.00
Question 2: Planning, designing and implementing of new
infrastructure
2.94 1.33 4.50
Question 3: Operational processes regarding service
delivery
3.06 1.00 4.50
Question 4: Maintenance of infrastructure and resources 3.18 2.67 3.75
Overall for Question 1 – Question 4 3.10 1.00 4.50
When considering the averages for each question/process area (see Table 10), the mean of the
overall maturity level is 3.1 and the standard deviation is 0.122. This indicates that the maturity
level for a certain process area, for all of the branches, will lie between 2.86 and 3.34 with a
certainty of 95%. Therefore it is necessary for the improvement of process quality, in order to
shift the mean to a higher maturity level. (The average and standard deviation discussed here is
not applicable for Admin and Management, because the process areas differ from the rest of the
branches). For bigger engineering departments where more employees can be interviewed, it
will be possible to determine the average maturity level of each branch, as well as the standard
deviation. This information can then be used to draw a graph which shows where employees
agree or disagree on the maturity level of a branch.
The results obtained for each process area of “Management” and “Admin” are displayed in Table
11 and Table 12 respectively.

Table 11: Maturity level results per process area for Management
1. General Management 3.00
2. Financial Management 4.00
3. Human Resources Management 1.00
4. Asset Management 3.00
Average 2.75
The score for Human Resources Management is very low and it is crucial to improve this score.
Managing human resources better may lead to improved performance for all of the branches.
Table 12: Maturity level results per process area for Admin
1.General Administration 1.33
2.Financial Administration 1.33
3. Human Resources Administration 1.00
4. Liaison and communication 3.00
Average 1.67
The overall score for Admin processes is very low. Standard procedures can be implemented to
improve the score.
Table 13 below shows the results obtained from various Transport, roads and stormwater
employees. The overall maturity level is level 4, which means that processes are managed. Also
note that the lowest score is 3.25, which is not bad compared to all of the other branches’
individual scores.
Figure 22 shows the difference in opinions of the Director and the rest of the Transport, roads
and stormwater employees with regards to this branch.

Table 13: Results for Transport, roads and stormwater
Director:
Engineering
services
Head: Traffic
Engineering
Head: Roads
and
Stormwater
Head:
Transport
Planning &
Public
Transport
Average
Question 1:
Planning budgets
and creating
implementation
plans.
4 1 5 5 3.75
Question 2:
Planning, designing
and implementing
of new
infrastructure and
transport
initiatives to enable
service delivery.
This includes roads
(and stormwater
systems), traffic
engineering and
public transport.
3 5 5 5 4.5
Question 3:
Operational
processes
regarding service
delivery (e.g.
operations of traffic
signalisation).
3 5 5 5 4.5
Question 4:
Maintenance of
infrastructure and
resources (e.g. road
maintenance).
3 5 2 5 3.75
Average 3.25 4 4.25 5 4.125

Figure 22: Graph for results of Transport, roads and stormwater
Table 14 shows the results for the Water and sewer reticulation branch. The overall score is
2.67. Discretion must be used in cases where the overall average is for instance 2.67. This result
may be interpreted in two ways. By simply rounding 2.67, the result will be a maturity level 3
which means that processes reached the Defined maturity level. This implies that processes are
well documented, standardised and integrated into the engineering department. However, 2.67
can be seen as almost reaching level 3, but not quite there yet and thus representing a maturity
level 2. This means that processes are consistent and stable, but not standardised and
documented. However, this final year project will assume that the rounded averages will be the
maturity level of each branch. Therefore, the overall maturity level for Water and sewer
reticulation will be categorised as level 3 (Defined level).
In Figure 23, note the difference between the results for the Director of Engineering Services
and the Head of Water Services.
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 1 2 3 4
Maturitylevel
Question number
Director
Head: Transport
Planning & Public
Transport
Head: Traffic
Engineering
Head: Roads and
Stormwater

Table 14: Results for Water and sewer reticulation
Director:
Engineering
services
Head: Water
Services
(Operations)
Average
4 2 3
Question 2: Planning, designing and
implementing of new infrastructure to enable
service delivery (e.g. expanding pipe
network).
3 2 2.5
Question 3: Operational processes regarding
service delivery and maintenance of
infrastructure and resources (e.g. repairing
broken pipes).
3 2 2.5
Average 3.33 2 2.67
Figure 23: Graph for results of Water and sewer reticulation
Solid waste management is classified as a Managed maturity level, because it reaches an overall
maturity level of 4 (3.63 rounded). Maintenance of infrastructure and resources is the process
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 1 2 3 4
Maturitylevel
Question number
Director
Head: Water Services
(Operations)

which scored lowest. Table 15 and Figure 24 clearly show that both the Director of Engineering
Services and the Principal Technician of Collections score all of the processes with at least a
maturity level 3. This means that processes are well standardised and documented.
Table 15: Results for Solid waste management
Director:
Engineering
services
Principal
Technician:
Collections
Average
4 3 3.5
implementing of new infrastructure to enable
service delivery (e.g. new disposal facilities).
3 5 4
Question 3: Operational processes regarding
service delivery (e.g. waste collection or
operation of disposal facilities).
3 5 4
Question 4: Maintenance of infrastructure and
resources (e.g. maintenance of collection
vehicles).
3 3 3
Average 3.25 4 3.63
Figure 24: Graph for results of Solid waste management
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 1 2 3 4
Maturitylevel
Question number
Director
Principal Technician:
Collections

Table 16 indicates that the Electrical services branch is at a maturity level of 3; the Defined
level. Figure 25 shows a big variance with regards to the scores obtained from each individual.
Special attention should be given to Question 2 and Question 3 in Table 16, since it represents
the two process areas which scored lowest.
Table 16: Results for Electrical services
Director:
Engineering
services
Manager:
Electrical
Services
Support
Assistant:
Electrical
Services
Average
Question 1: Planning budgets and
creating implementation plans.
4 2 5 3.67
implementing of the electrical
network to enable service delivery.
3 2 2 2.33
Question 3: Operational processes
regarding service delivery (e.g.
selling of pre-paid electricity)
3 2 2 2.33
Question 4: Maintenance of
infrastructure and resources (e.g.
maintenance of the distribution
network).
3 4 4 3.67
Average 3.25 2.5 3.25 3

Figure 25: Graph for results of Electrical Services
The results for the Admin branch follow next in Table 17 and Figure 26. Note that there are two
Admin Support employees and therefore the numbers 1 and 2 are used to distinguish between
the results of each employee. The Admin branch has the lowest score, 1.67, of all of the
branches. This means that Admin only nearly reaches a maturity level of 2, which in turn
represents the Repeatable maturity level. This low score is due to the fact that most of the
processes happen on an ad-hoc basis. Ms Silvia Pretorius, an Admin Support employee,
explained that all of her admin processes are on an ad-hoc basis and that there is no system in
place for guidance in the processes for which she is responsible. These processes basically
depend solely on her skills and knowledge. Ms Sharntelle Poole, the other interviewed Admin
Support employee, complained about the instability of the processes for which she is
responsible for. She states that the rules for handling the work changes too often.
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 1 2 3 4
Maturitylevel
Question number
Director: Engineering services
Manager: Electrical Services
Support Assistent: Electrical
Services

Table 17: Results for Admin
Director:
Engineering
services
Admin
Support (1)
Admin
Support (2)
Average
Question 1: General
Administration
2 1 1 1.33
Question 2: Financial
Administration
2 1 1 1.33
Question 3: Human Resources
Administration
1 1 1 1.00
Question 4: Liaison and
communication
3 1 5 3.00
Average 2 1 2 1.67
Figure 26: Graph for results of Admin
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 1 2 3 4
Maturitylevel
Question number
Director: Engineering
services
Admin Support (1)
Admin Support (2)

5.3 Conclusion
This chapter revealed that the overall maturity level for the Engineering department of
Stellenbosch Municipality is the Defined level. This indicates that most processes are
standardised, documented and integrated into the engineering department. It was however,
noted that there is a big variance between the scores of all of the branches and that some
branches are only at the Repeatable level (level 2). These processes need urgent attention to
improve performance. Issues regarding such low scores are due to the fact that there were no
standard procedures in place, or that the procedures changed too often.
Although the Defined level of maturity is reached, it must be stated that for most processes, the
Engineering department of Stellenbosch Municipality only has mere guidelines for what needs
to be done; as opposed to exact descriptions of what is expected from an employee and how to
reach the exact expectations (i.e. how to do a proper job to reach the objectives of the
municipality).
Some branches (such as Water Services) state that it is difficult to do proper planning of
processes, or setting standards for these processes, because other branches, or even other
departments, has a major influence on the day to day activities that need to happen. This issue
applies to both schedules and budgets.
Management plays an important role in terms of planning and strategising, and a better
maturity level for Management may lead to an improvement in the overall maturity level of the
Engineering department of Stellenbosch Municipality.
This municipality should focus on documenting exactly how to perform each process, so that
workers will have a clear framework to rely on. When processes are documented, a means of
measuring the productivity and quality of outputs should be established. Outputs must then be
measured and analysed regularly, to identify problems which must be solved accordingly. If
processes are in a state of control, the municipality should focus on continuous improvement by
identifying and eliminating chronic problems.

6. Conclusion
6.1 Reflecting on methodology
A basic service can be defined as a service that is necessary to ensure an acceptable and
reasonable quality of life and which, if not provided, would endanger public health, safety and
the environment. Municipalities are responsible for delivering basic services such as clean
water, electricity, sanitation, municipal roads and public transport. To deliver sufficient basic
services, a Service Delivery Path approach must be followed. This path requires effective
planning (strategic, tactical and operational).
Backlogs and the lack of basic service delivery have caused a dramatic rise in the amount of
protests in South Africa over the past few years. There is thus an urgent need for better living
conditions in South Africa. In order to improve this problematic situation, it is necessary to first
identify the origins of the problem.
A maturity model can be helpful in assessing the current situation of an organisation. This
model evaluates the processes of an organisation and then determines the level of maturity.
Level 1 is the poorest level and is referred to as the Ad-hoc level. Level 5 is the best level and is
referred to as Optimising. A maturity model can therefore be useful for assessing processes
within an organisation to determine the current level of maturity. This model will establish the
strengths and weaknesses of the municipality. Organisations can then use these results to
improve on their weaknesses and to maintain their strengths. A maturity model is also useful
for determining where managers and associates agree or disagree in terms of the maturity level
of processes.
Information gathered about municipalities and maturity models were used to develop a tool for
assessing the maturity level of the Engineering department of Stellenbosch Municipality. This
required developing relevant and valid questions and then building a user friendly form.
This questionnaire was then used to assess the capability of the engineering department to
deliver the basic services. It was found that the overall maturity level of the Engineering
department of Stellenbosch Municipality is the Defined level (level 3). However, it must be

Paula_Werth_15710181_Final Year Project

Paula_Werth_15710181_Final Year Project

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (19)

Ähnlich wie Paula_Werth_15710181_Final Year Project

Ähnlich wie Paula_Werth_15710181_Final Year Project (20)

Paula_Werth_15710181_Final Year Project