Editor's note: The IAPP is policy neutral. We publish contributed opinion and analysis pieces to enable our members to hear a broad spectrum of views in our domains.
With the growing reliance on digital systems and continuous evolution of myriad regulatory laws across the globe, it is essential organizations not only consider data privacy a checkbox exercise, but also ensure it is embedded effectively in day-to-day operations.
Privacy maturity models — a set of indicators that represent capability and progression within a privacy program — can serve as a tool for organizations. Privacy maturity models effectuate continual improvement and develop behaviors that decrease risks related to the privacy of personal data. The goal is to outline the areas or domains that require improvement and achieve business objectives by managing risks related to personal information.
Objectives of privacy maturity assessments
Organizations conducting privacy maturity assessments are usually looking to:
- Enhance organizational privacy posture through targeted improvements to privacy practices.
- Identify strengths and weaknesses in privacy controls and capabilities to address business risks.
- Systematically identify gaps, reinforce security measures and facilitate informed decision-making in data governance to strengthen information security.
- Implement continuous maturity tracking through periodic privacy impact assessments to proactively mitigate risks and adapt to emerging privacy challenges.
- Develop standardized, repeatable processes that foster long-term privacy resilience.
- Encourage process automation as a fundamental component of operational efficiency — for example, introducing privacy operations to automate compliance with privacy regulations.
The privacy maturity model framework
While multiple models exist to guide privacy assessments, one structured approach draws from the Capability Maturity Model Integration framework. This privacy maturity model is categorized into five distinct levels, measuring an organization's progression from initial privacy awareness to optimized resilience.
At Level 1, documentation is minimal; privacy practices are unpredictable; and formalized policies are missing.
As an organization progresses to Level 2, some basic privacy documentation emerges, but processes remain non-standardized, reactive and inconsistent. Policies exist, but coverage is not comprehensive.
Reaching Level 3 means privacy measures have become more proactive — documentation is standardized, practices are consistent and governance roles are clearly established.
Things get more refined at Level 4, where organizations introduce advanced metrics, like a privacy impact assessment completion rate, privacy incident rate, or employee awareness training percentage. Automation tools help streamline workflows and structured key performance indicators ensure effectiveness.
Finally, privacy becomes part of an organization's DNA at Level 5. Processes are continuously refined; automated workflows are embedded; and privacy operations are seamlessly integrated into everyday functions.
Key capabilities of privacy maturity assessments
To understand where an organization stands, a structured privacy maturity assessment evaluates five main capabilities. Privacy guidelines, process flow, and clearly outlined roles and responsibilities fall under policy and process. This includes creating a matrix of roles and responsibilities and establishing internal guidelines for regions where global policies may not apply.
Risk governance plays a vital role in compliance, tracking through internal audits and awareness programs. Organizations need to maintain documented evidence to demonstrate effective governance and mechanisms to monitor adherence to regulatory frameworks, like the International Organization for Standardization and the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Technology and automation capabilities further strengthen privacy efforts by integrating automated enforcement tools that help mitigate risks and streamline operations — for example, auto-purging personal information once retention timelines expire, managing the consent lifecycle or automating the fulfillment of data subject requests.
Metrics capabilities ensure continuous monitoring and benchmarking by establishing measurable privacy indicators. This includes setting key performance and risk indicators, defining service level agreements for timely DSR responses, and setting up reporting mechanisms and resolution timelines for data breaches.
Finally, organizational structure is assessed to confirm whether privacy-related roles outlined in organizational policies are formally established — for example, verifying if a data protection officer has been appointed, a dedicated team is managing DSRs, and an incident manager is in place to effectively handle privacy-related incidents.
The privacy maturity model framework offers organizations a structured path to enhance their privacy posture. Through continual assessment and progressive improvement across the defined maturity levels, organizations can mitigate privacy risks, refine governance frameworks and establish privacy as a core component of their operational strategy. This helps shift privacy from ad hoc compliance to operational excellence and strategic advantage.
Ankita Kaw, CIPP/US, is a data privacy consultant at GE Healthcare.
