RDI maturity assessment
Assess where site reality becomes trusted evidence, accountable action, and measured outcome.
Where evidence can fail
Find where evidence stops before it changes a decision.
Capture
86%
Ground truth
64%
Interpretation
48%
Action
42%
Command
28%
Measurement
35%
- 01
Reality capture
Do critical areas, activities, and events have reliable visual or sensor coverage?
- 02
Ground Truth
Can records be trusted by time, location, project context, and preservation history?
- 03
Interpretation
Can the team identify patterns, exceptions, risks, and likely outcomes from the record?
- 04
Action
Does each workflow have an owner who reviews, routes, and closes the loop?
- 05
Command
Are evidence and actions visible enough for leaders to direct attention across projects?
- 06
Outcome measurement
Can the team measure time saved, risk reduced, disputes avoided, or decisions improved?
Visibility, control, optimization
The score is less important than the pattern. A weak area tells you where the first workflow will fail.
What is happening?
Visibility
Reality Capture and Ground Truth
The record exists, but evidence stops at a dashboard, inbox, or archive.
What should we do now?
Control
Interpretation and Action
Findings are visible, but ownership and follow-through depend on individual habits.
How do we improve outcomes over time?
Optimization
Command
Local actions happen, but the organization does not learn from recurring evidence.
A future public benchmark can publish anonymized maturity patterns once enough teams use the same assessment language.