Global Journal of Management and Business Research, A: Administration and Management, Volume 23 Issue 10

Factor 20 0,033 (0,036; 0,030; 0,033; 0,033) (0,023; 0,026; 0,026; 0,03) (0,02; 0,023; 0,024; 0,027) Factor 21 0,033 (0,036; 0,030; 0,033; 0,033) (0,023; 0,026; 0,026; 0,03) (0,02; 0,023; 0,024; 0,027) Factor 22 0,033 (0,036; 0,030; 0,033; 0,033) (0,023; 0,026; 0,026; 0,03) (0,023; 0,026; 0,026; 0,03) Factor 23 0,035 (0,028; 0,031; 0,035; 0,035) (0,024; 0,028; 0,028; 0,031) (0,015; 0,018; 0,019; 0,022) Factor 24 0,035 (0,028; 0,031; 0,035; 0,035) (0,017; 0,021; 0,024; 0,028) (0,018; 0,022; 0,024; 0,027) Factor 25 0,035 (0,028; 0,031; 0,035; 0,035) (0,017; 0,021; 0,024; 0,028) (0,017; 0,02; 0,021; 0,024) Factor 26 0,035 (0,028; 0,031; 0,035; 0,035) (0,017; 0,021; 0,024; 0,028) (0,024; 0,027; 0,029; 0,031) Factor 27 0,035 (0,028; 0,031; 0,035; 0,035) (0,024; 0,028; 0,028; 0,031) (0,02; 0,023; 0,024; 0,028) Therefore, the ideal and anti-ideal distance was calculated using equations (13) and (14). For the ideal solution, we considered the factor weights and, for the anti-ideal solution, weight 0 was considered. In the final step, the proximity coeficiente was calculated using equation (15). From the proximity coefficient, the maturity level of each evaluation alternative was also calculated using equation (16), as shown in Table XIII. Table XIII: Proximity Coefficient and Maturity Level Evaluation Alternatives ∗ − Maturity Index Utopian DIPAT + 0,141 1,723 0,924 1 Reference DIPAT 0,677 1,154 0,630 0,68 Real DIPAT A 0,627 1,199 0,657 0,71 V. Analysis of Results a) Analysis of the Maturity Level Based on Table IV, Real DIPAT presented a maturity level 3. Therefore, it presents a “defined” maturity, with actions in search of building and developing the capacity of process management and expanding the individuals who analyze the organization of a company. process perspective. Generally, the sector with a level 3 maturity has the combination of the following characteristics (Rosemann et al ., 2006): (i) use of elaborate tools (for example, process redesign, workflow management and risk management based on in processes); (ii) combination of different process management methods and tools; (iii) wider use of technology for delivery and communication about processes (for example, process designs available to users via the intranet); and (iv) comprehensive and formal training. Reference DIPAT also presented maturity level 3 and Utopian DIPAT + presented maturity level 5 (optimized), as this alternative serves as the basis for calculating the maturity index. Figure 2 shows the graph on the maturity level of each analyzed DIPAT. Figure 2: Maturity Level Innovative Multicriteria Approach to Business Process Management Maturity in the Public Sector Global Journal of Management and Business Research ( A ) XXIII Issue X Version I Year 2023 63 © 2023 Global Journals