# Scoring Model The score is not the point. The Design Assessment uses scoring to make patterns easier to see. It helps teams understand where design impact is strong, where it breaks down, and where improvement will create the most movement. Each dimension is scored separately: - [Organizing Work](https://glare.helio.app/document-overview/design-assessment/results-guide/organizing-work) - [Managing Complexity](https://glare.helio.app/document-overview/design-assessment/results-guide/managing-complexity) - [Building Proof](https://glare.helio.app/document-overview/design-assessment/results-guide/building-proof) - [Guiding Decisions](https://glare.helio.app/document-overview/design-assessment/results-guide/guiding-decisions) - [Scaling Influence](https://glare.helio.app/document-overview/design-assessment/results-guide/scaling-influence) Together, those scores show how well design impact moves through the organization, from early thinking to proof, decisions, and influence. ## **Why scoring matters** Most teams have a general sense of where design is working and where it is struggling. But that sense is often hard to explain. One person may think the issue is process. Another may think it is research. Another may think leadership does not understand the value. Each view may be partly true, but without a shared scoring model, the team keeps debating the problem instead of improving it. The Scoring Model creates a shared way to talk about design maturity. It helps teams see: - Where work is clear - Where work slows down - Where evidence gets lost - Where decisions stay fuzzy - Where proof does not travel - Where the next improvement should start The goal is not to judge the team, but to make the system easier to improve. ## **What the score measures** The score measures how consistently design creates clarity, proof, momentum, and influence. - A strong score means the team has a repeatable way to move design work forward. - A weak score means the team may still be doing good work, but the system around the work is breaking down. The assessment looks at how well the team can: - Start work with clear intent - Keep learning connected - Manage work as it grows - Turn signals into decisions - Connect outcomes to proof - Make design evidence useful beyond one project The score measures how well the organization turns design work into visible impact. * * * ## **How the score works** Each dimension receives its own score. That score shows how mature the team is in that specific area of design impact. For example: - Organizing Work shows whether design knowledge compounds or gets lost. - Managing Complexity shows whether teams can handle work as it grows. - Building Proof shows whether design outcomes connect to measurable results. - Guiding Decisions shows whether signals turn into clear choices. - Scaling Influence shows whether proof travels beyond the immediate team. Each dimension can be strong or weak on its own. A team might be strong at organizing work but weak at scaling influence. Another team might make fast decisions but struggle to build proof. The full assessment shows how those strengths and gaps work together. ### **What goes into the score** The score comes from the Design Assessment survey. Each survey response is mapped to one of the five dimensions: - Organizing Work - Managing Complexity - Building Proof - Guiding Decisions - Scaling Influence Those responses are scored to show how consistently the team shows mature design behaviors in each dimension. The score is based on how people describe the way work actually happens, not how the team hopes the process works. That matters because the assessment is looking for patterns in the system: - Where work is clear - Where learning gets lost - Where complexity slows progress - Where proof breaks down - Where decisions lose momentum - Where influence stops moving The survey gives the raw input. The scoring model turns those responses into a clearer view of design maturity. ### **Score ranges**

Score

Summary

0–40: Reactive

Design impact is hard to trace.

The team may be working hard, but the system is mostly informal. Decisions rely on memory, meetings, opinions, or individual effort. Evidence exists, but it is scattered, delayed, or hard to reuse. This usually means the team needs a clearer foundation before trying to scale.

41–60: Developing

Some practices exist, but they are inconsistent.

The team may have pockets of strong work, but the impact depends on specific people, projects, or moments. Evidence is created, but it does not always shape decisions or travel across teams. This usually means the team needs more consistency.

61–80: Functional

The team has a working system.

Design work is easier to explain, evidence is used more often, and decisions are clearer. Some gaps still exist, but the team has enough structure to create repeatable progress. This usually means the team can improve by tightening the weakest parts of the system.

81–90: Strong

Design impact is visible and repeatable.

The team can connect work to evidence, decisions, and outcomes. Leaders can understand the value. Signals are used to guide direction, not just explain work after the fact. This usually means the team is ready to scale what is working.

91–100: Leading

Design is part of the organization’s decision system.

The team consistently uses evidence to shape priorities, reduce risk, guide investment, and improve outcomes. Design proof travels across teams and influences larger decisions. This usually means the team is not just producing design work. It is helping the organization decide better.

## **The score is not the story** The number is useful, but the pattern matters more. The score comes from the Design Assessment survey. It reflects how people describe the way design work actually happens across the organization. But one number cannot explain the whole system by itself. Two teams can both score 75 and have very different problems. One team may be balanced, with every dimension working at a functional level. Another team may have one very strong dimension hiding deeper gaps elsewhere. That is why the assessment should always ask: - Where are we strongest? - Where does work slow down? - Where does proof fade? - Where do decisions get stuck? - Where does influence stop? - What should we improve first? The score helps start the conversation. The pattern helps the team know what to do. ## **How to read dimension scores** Read each dimension score in two ways. First, read it on its own. Ask: - What does this score say about this dimension? - What is working? - What is weak? - What behavior is creating the score? - What would make this dimension stronger? Then read it against the other dimensions. Ask: - Is this dimension helping or hurting the system? - Is it creating drag somewhere else? - Is it strong enough to support the next dimension? - Is this the best place to improve first? A low score does not always mean it should be fixed first. The best place to start is usually the dimension where improvement will create the most movement across the system. ## **Example score pattern** A team might score: - Organizing Work: 82 - Managing Complexity: 55 - Building Proof: 70 - Guiding Decisions: 62 - Scaling Influence: 48 This team is not starting from zero. It has a strong ability to organize design knowledge. Some proof is being built. Decisions are happening, but they may not be as clear or consistent as they need to be. The larger issue is that the work gets harder as complexity grows, and proof does not travel far enough. In this case, the team may not need to improve documentation first. It may need to strengthen Managing Complexity so larger work stays clear, or Scaling Influence so the proof already being created reaches leadership and shapes bigger decisions. The score points to the issue. The pattern shows where to act. * * * ## **How the scoring pages work together** The Scoring Model explains what the score means. The other scoring pages help teams understand and act on the results: - [How It’s Measured](https://glare.helio.app/document-overview/design-assessment/scoring/how-it-s-measured) explains the structure behind the evaluation. - [Reading Patterns](https://glare.helio.app/document-overview/design-assessment/scoring/reading-patterns) explains how to interpret uneven, balanced, high, or low scores. - [Using Results](https://glare.helio.app/document-overview/design-assessment/scoring/using-results) explains how to turn the assessment into a focused improvement plan. Use the Scoring Model first to understand the maturity level. Then use the other scoring pages to understand what the pattern means and what to strengthen next. ### **Next step** Review your five dimension scores. Start with the number, but do not stop there. Ask: - What is the pattern? - Which dimension is strongest? - Which dimension creates the most drag? - Which improvement would help the whole system move better? The goal is not to chase a perfect score, but to understand where design impact breaks down and make the next improvement visible.