ISO 9241-222:2026

Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 222: Self-assessment of human-centred design approach

This document provides a self-assessment of an organization’s human-centred design principles, processes, and activities throughout the life cycle of computer-based interactive systems. It also provides an overview of information given in the ISO 9241-200 series of standards. It is intended to be used as an introduction and self-assessment guide to human-centred design (HCD). Its target audience is personnel responsible for and managing design processes, and it is concerned with ways in which both hardware and software components of interactive systems can enhance human–system interaction. This document does not provide detailed coverage of the methods and techniques required for human-centred design, nor does it address health or safety aspects in detail. Although it addresses the planning and management of human-centred design, it does not address all aspects of project management. NOTE Detailed human factors, ergonomics, usability and accessibility issues are dealt with more fully in a number of standards including other parts of ISO 9241 and ISO 6385, which sets out the broad principles of ergonomics.

Ergonomie de l'interaction homme/système — Partie 222: Auto-évaluation de l'approche de la conception centrée sur l'opérateur humain

General Information

• Status: Published
• Publication Date: 25-Jun-2026
• ICS: 13.180 - Ergonomics
• Technical Committee: ISO/TC 159/SC 4 - Ergonomics of human-system interaction
• Drafting Committee: ISO/TC 159/SC 4/WG 6 - Human-centred design processes for interactive systems
• Current Stage: 6060 - International Standard published
• Start Date: 26-Jun-2026
• Due Date: 05-Jun-2027
• Completion Date: 26-Jun-2026

Overview

ISO 9241-222:2025 - Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 222: Self-assessment of human-centred design approach provides guidance for organizations to evaluate and improve their human-centred design (HCD) practices. This standard acts as an introduction to HCD self-assessment, helping organizations of any size systematically review their human-centred design principles, processes, and activities throughout the life cycle of interactive computer-based systems. ISO 9241-222 is particularly valuable for managers, project leads, and those overseeing technology design processes, focusing on both hardware and software elements that enhance human-system interaction.

The document supplies practical tools, such as surveys and assessment matrices, to help organizations identify strengths and gaps in their HCD practices. While it serves as a foundational guide, ISO 9241-222 complements more advanced and detailed standards in the ISO 9241-200 series.

Key Topics

• Human-centred design (HCD) principles: Focuses on placing users’ needs, goals, and capabilities at the center of interactive system design and implementation.
• Self-assessment framework: Provides both a survey and assessment matrices to help organizations measure their maturity in adopting and integrating HCD.
• Organizational and project-level evaluation: Distinguishes between assessing HCD at the organizational level and for individual projects, supporting targeted improvement.
• Continuous improvement: Encourages organizations to use assessment results as the basis for ongoing review and enhancement of human-centred design practices.
• Alignment with other standards: Offers a bridge to more specific HCD, usability, accessibility, and ergonomics standards, facilitating a phased approach to achieving conformance.

Applications

The main applications of ISO 9241-222 include:

• Benchmarking HCD practices: Organizations can use the standard’s self-assessment tools to identify their current level of human-centred design maturity and compare against best practices.
• Strategy development: Helps inform development of business strategies that integrate HCD objectives and key performance indicators.
• Process improvement: Supports identification of gaps in existing procedures and resource allocation regarding human-centred design, leading to more effective workflows.
• Training and resource planning: Highlights the need for trained HCD professionals and organizational infrastructure, aiding in workforce development and tool selection.
• Project assessment: Enables both self-led and independent evaluations of individual technology projects to ensure alignment with organizational HCD policies.
• Entry point for HCD standards adoption: Acts as an accessible introduction for organizations new to human-centred design, guiding them towards more comprehensive HCD standards, such as ISO 9241-210 (Human-centred design for interactive systems), ISO 9241-220 (Processes for enabling HCD), and ISO 9241-221 (Process assessment model).

Related Standards

Organizations seeking to build on the foundations provided by ISO 9241-222 should consider integrating the following standards into their practices:

• ISO 9241-210: Human-centred design for interactive systems - details fundamental HCD processes and activities.
• ISO 9241-220: Processes for enabling human-centred design - outlines enabling processes that support HCD integration into organizations.
• ISO 9241-221: Guidance on evaluating process capability for HCD - supports third-party or in-depth process maturity assessments.
• ISO 6385: Principles of ergonomics - offers general guidance on ergonomics applicable to a wide range of systems and environments.

By using ISO 9241-222 as a stepping stone, organizations can promote user-focused development, ensure usability and accessibility, and maintain competitive, efficient, and safe interactive systems throughout their lifecycle. This standard supports a culture of continuous improvement, pushing organizations toward excellence in human-system interaction and user experience.

Standards Content (Sample)

International
Standard
ISO 9241-222
First edition
Ergonomics of human-system
2026-06
interaction —
Part 222:
Self-assessment of human-centred
design approach
Ergonomie de l'interaction homme/système —
Partie 222: Auto-évaluation de l'approche de la conception
centrée sur l'opérateur humain
Reference number
© ISO 2026
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Human-centred design self-assessment . 5
5 How to use this document . 5
6 Human-centred design self-assessment survey . 6
6.1 General .6
6.1.1 Presentation .6
6.1.2 ORG versus PROJ questions .6
6.1.3 Scoring an assessment .7
6.2 Questions relating to human-centred design approach at an organization .7
6.2.1 Question: HCD in business strategy (ORG 1) .7
6.2.2 Question: HCD as normal practice (ORG 2) .8
6.2.3 Question: Integration with system development (ORG 3) .8
6.2.4 Question: Resources and infrastructure (ORG 4) .9
6.2.5 Question: Governance and performance (ORG 5) .10
6.2.6 Question: Introduction, operation, upgrade, and end of life of systems (ORG 6) .11
6.3 Questions relating to human-centred design approach for a project or projects .11
6.3.1 Question: Plan and manage HCD for projects (PROJ 1) .11
6.3.2 Question: Identify the context of use (PROJ 2) . 12
6.3.3 Question: Establish user requirements (PROJ 3) . 13
6.3.4 Question: Design solutions that meet user requirements (PROJ 4) .14
6.3.5 Question: User-centred evaluation (PROJ 5) . 15
7 Relating the self-assessment to relevant standards and evaluator-led assessments .15
8 Post-assessment approach . 16
8.1 General .16
8.2 More detailed assessment .16
8.3 Continuous improvement and re-assessment .17
8.4 Comparison . .17
Annex A (informative) Using the human-centred design self-assessment matrices .18
Annex B (Informative) Human-centred design self-assessment matrix for evaluating
organizations . 19
Annex C (Informative) Human-centred design self-assessment matrix for evaluating projects .22
Bibliography .24

iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through
ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee
has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations,
governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely
with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are described
in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the different types
of ISO document should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the editorial rules of the
ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use of (a)
patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed patent
rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received notice of (a)
patent(s) which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are cautioned that
this may not represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent database available at
www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and expressions
related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the World Trade
Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 159, Ergonomics, Subcommittee SC 4,
Ergonomics of human-system interaction.
A list of all parts in the ISO 9241 series can be found on the ISO website.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.

iv
Introduction
Human-centred design is an approach to interactive systems development that aims to make systems
usable and useful by focusing on the users, their needs and requirements, and by applying human factors,
ergonomics, and usability knowledge and techniques. This approach enhances effectiveness and efficiency,
improves human well-being, user satisfaction, accessibility and sustainability; and counteracts possible
adverse effects of use on human health, safety and performance.
The purpose of this document is to provide an accessible entry point into the ISO 9241-200 series, specifically
for organizations who do not have any experience with adopting and implementing the human-centred
design approach. While the description of the human-centred design approach and self-assessment included
in this document can stand alone, the descriptions and assessments in other standards are notably more
detailed and robust.
This document is characterized by the following:
— It includes a self-assessment that allows an organization to determine what principles are already being
followed and where improvement can be made, with respect to best practices of human-centred design.
— It is intended to be accessible by less-mature organizations (with respect to human-centred design), to
help them grow into more mature organizations.
— It is in alignment with the rest of the ISO 9241-200 series, so it can act as an entry point to the more
detailed and involved parts like ISO 9241-210 and ISO 9241-220.
— It drives organizations, by learning about gaps in their processes and practices, to close those gaps by
learning more about best practices, including through other relevant ISO standards for human-centred
design like the whole ISO 9241 series.
It includes a self-assessment that allows organizations to understand and assess their level of awareness
and practices with respect to the human-centred design approach and best practices for organizations and
project teams within that organization. This self-assessment is provided as a set of survey questions as well
as assessment matrices. The survey can be used directly (answering the survey questions to perform an
assessment) or by surveying a number of members of a project team or organization. The matrices can be
used to report and visualize the results of the survey-based assessment, or as rapid assessments in their
own right.
Self-assessment matrices that can be used for organizations to assess their level of maturity and support
claims of conformance are provided as informative annexes. These matrices are convenient grids of
questions and answers designed to simplify collecting survey data.
NOTE 1 Although this document is described as a self-assessment tool, it can also be used as a convenient worksheet
(especially Annexes B and C) for evaluator-led assessments. It provides a means for ergonomics, human factors, UX,
and usability consultants to assist organizations in gathering insights into their maturity with respect to the HCD
processes defined in ISO 9241-220.
NOTE 2 ISO 9241-221 provides a tool for rigorous and defensible process capability assessment (for example, for the
purpose of process implementation, certification, preparation of a process improvement campaign, or demonstration
of capability within a contract). ISO 9241-221 is intended for use by organizations that want to address and improve
their treatment of human-centred design of either their internal systems or the products and services they provide,
and the procurement of systems and parts of systems. The processes can be applied by small- and medium-sized
enterprises as well as by large organizations. The assessment is normally performed by a third-party process
assessment provider according to professional process capability assessment practices.

v
International Standard ISO 9241-222:2026(en)
Ergonomics of human-system interaction —
Part 222:
Self-assessment of human-centred design approach
1 Scope
This document provides a self-assessment of an organization’s human-centred design principles, processes,
and activities throughout the life cycle of computer-based interactive systems. It also provides an overview
of information given in the ISO 9241-200 series of standards. It is intended to be used as an introduction
and self-assessment guide to human-centred design (HCD). Its target audience is personnel responsible
for and managing design processes, and it is concerned with ways in which both hardware and software
components of interactive systems can enhance human–system interaction.
This document does not provide detailed coverage of the methods and techniques required for human-
centred design, nor does it address health or safety aspects in detail. Although it addresses the planning and
management of human-centred design, it does not address all aspects of project management.
NOTE Detailed human factors, ergonomics, usability and accessibility issues are dealt with more fully in a number
of standards including other parts of ISO 9241 and ISO 6385, which sets out the broad principles of ergonomics.
2 Normative references
There are no normative references in this document.
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/
3.1
accessibility
extent to which products, systems, services, environments and facilities can be used by people from a
population with the widest range of user needs, characteristics and capabilities to achieve identified goals in
identified contexts of use
Note 1 to entry: Context of use includes direct use or use supported by assistive technologies.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-112:2025, 3.11]
3.2
context of use
combination of users, goals and tasks, resources, and environment
Note 1 to entry: The “environment” in a context of use includes the technical, physical, social, cultural and
organizational environments.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.1.15]

3.3
effectiveness
accuracy and completeness with which users achieve specified goals
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.1.12]
3.4
efficiency
resources used in relation to the results achieved
Note 1 to entry: Typical resources include time, human effort, costs and materials.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.1.13]
3.5
goal
intended outcome
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.1.10]
3.6
human-centred design
HCD
approach to systems design and development that aims to make interactive systems more usable by focusing
on the use of the system and applying human factors, ergonomics and usability knowledge and techniques
Note 1 to entry: The term “human-centred design” is used rather than “user-centred design” in order to emphasize
that this document also addresses impacts on a number of stakeholders, not just those typically considered as users.
However, in practice, these terms are often used synonymously.
Note 2 to entry: Usable systems can provide a number of benefits, including improved productivity, enhanced user
well-being, avoidance of stress, increased accessibility and reduced risk of harm.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.2.6]
3.7
human-centred quality
extent to which requirements for usability, accessibility, user experience and avoidance of harm from use
are met
Note 1 to entry: Provision of the necessary technical functionality is a prerequisite for human-centred quality.
Note 2 to entry: Usability, accessibility, user experience and avoidance of harm from use can only be managed by
human-centred design to the extent that they can be controlled by designed aspects of the interactive system.
Note 3 to entry: Human-centred quality is a collective term for the intended outcomes of interaction of the user with
the system.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.2.1, modified — "by human-centred design" added to Note 2 to entry.]
3.8
human-centred success criteria
set of agreed metrics used to evaluate the success of a product or service improvement or a new product or
service
Note 1 to entry: These criteria are established by first defining desired impacts or outcomes, which can be at various
levels such as user experience (e.g., reducing time to perform a specific task), transactional (e.g., increasing desired
actions; increasing completion rates of desired tasks), or policy (e.g., improving access to functions or services).
Note 2 to entry: Human-centred success criteria are measurable and have a desired target threshold value.

3.9
interactive system
combination of hardware, software, services, and people that users interact with in order to achieve specific
goals
Note 1 to entry: This includes, where appropriate, packaging, user documentation, on-line and human help, support
and training.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11: 2018, 3.1.5]
3.10
satisfaction
extent to which the user's physical, cognitive and emotional responses that result from the use of a system,
product or service meet the user’s needs and expectations
Note 1 to entry: Satisfaction includes the extent to which the user experience that results from actual use meets the
user’s needs and expectations.
Note 2 to entry: Anticipated use can influence satisfaction with actual use.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.1.14]
3.11
stakeholder
individual or organization having a right, share, claim or interest in a system or in its possession of
characteristics that meet their needs and expectations
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC 15288:2023, 3.44]
3.12
task
set of activities undertaken in order to achieve a specific goal
Note 1 to entry: These activities can be physical, perceptual, or cognitive.
Note 2 to entry: While goals are independent of the means used to achieve them, tasks describe particular means of
achieving goals.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.1.11]
3.13
usability
extent to which a system, product or service can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with
effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use
Note 1 to entry: The “specified” users, goals and context of use refer to the particular combination of users, goals and
context of use for which usability is being considered.
Note 2 to entry: The word “usability” is also used as a qualifier to refer to the design knowledge, competencies,
activities and design attributes that contribute to usability, such as usability expertise, usability professional, usability
engineering, usability method, usability evaluation, usability heuristic.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.1.1]
3.14
user
person who interacts with a system, product or service
Note 1 to entry: Users of a system, product or service include people who operate the system, people who make use of
the output of the system and people who support the system (including providing maintenance and training).
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.1.7]

3.15
user experience
user’s perceptions and responses that result from the use or anticipated use of a system, product or service
Note 1 to entry: Users’ perceptions and responses include the users’ emotions, beliefs, preferences, perceptions,
comfort, behaviours, and accomplishments that occur before, during and after use.
Note 2 to entry: User experience is a consequence of brand image, presentation, functionality, system performance,
interactive behaviour, and assistive capabilities of a system, product or service. It also results from the user’s internal
and physical state resulting from prior experiences, attitudes, skills, abilities and personality; and from the context of
use.
Note 3 to entry: The term "user experience" can also be used to refer to competence or processes such as user
experience professional, user experience design, user experience method, user experience evaluation, user experience
research, user experience department.
Note 4 to entry: Human-centred design can only manage those aspects of user experience that result from designed
aspects of the interactive system.
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-11:2018, 3.2.3]
3.16
user interface
set of all the components of an interactive system that provide information and controls for the user to
accomplish specific tasks with the interactive system
[SOURCE: ISO 9241-110:2020, 3.10]
3.17
user need
prerequisite identified as necessary for a user, or a set of users, to achieve an intended outcome, implied or
stated within a specific context of use
EXAMPLE 1 A presenter (user) needs to know how much time is left (prerequisite) in order to complete the
presentation in time (intended outcome) during a presentation with a fixed time limit (context of use).
EXAMPLE 2 An account manager (user) needs to know the number of invoices received and their amounts
(prerequisite), in order to complete the daily accounting log (intended outcome) as part of monitoring the cash flow
(context of use).
Note 1 to entry: A user need is independent of any proposed solution for that need.
Note 2 to entry: User needs are identified based on various approaches including interviews with users, observations,
surveys, evaluations, expert analysis, etc.
Note 3 to entry: User needs often represent gaps (or discrepancies) between what is supposed to be and what is.
Note 4 to entry: User needs are transformed into user requirements considering the context of use, user priorities,
trade-offs with other system requirements and constraints.
[SOURCE: ISO 25064:2013, 4.19]
3.18
user requirements
requirements for use that provide the basis for design and evaluation of interactive systems to meet
identified user needs
Note 1 to entry: User requirements are derived from user needs and capabilities in order to make use of the system in
an effective, efficient, safe and satisfying manner.
Note 2 to entry: User requirements specify the extent to which user needs and capabilities are to be met when using
the system. They are not requirements on the users.
Note 3 to entry: In software-engineering terms, user requirements comprise both “functional” and “non-functional”
requirements based on user needs and capabilities.

[SOURCE: ISO 25064:2013, 4.20]
4 Human-centred design self-assessment
This document describes a self-assessment that allows organizations to understand and assess their level
of awareness and practices with respect to the human-centred design approach and best practices for
organizations and project teams within that organization.
Correctly and completely assessing an organization’s human-centred design maturity level can be involved,
complex, and lengthy. ISO 9241-210:2019, for example, includes a conformance checklist in Annex B that has
over 100 criteria. ISO 9241-220 has a section on conformance that includes methods for tailoring processes to
a specific organizational context and references documents on information technology process assessment
developed by ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 7 for application of requirements. ISO 9241-221 includes a process assessment
model and a process reference model, in accordance with ISO/IEC 33020. Typically, an organization will be
at a high level of process maturity to be aware of these standards and how to use them.
This document provides an overview of information given in the ISO 9241-200 series about requirements
and recommendations for human-centred design principles, processes, and activities throughout the life
cycle of computer-based interactive systems. It is intended to be used as an introduction and self-assessment
guide to human-centred design (HCD). Its target audience is personnel responsible for and managing design
processes, and it is concerned with ways in which both hardware and software components of interactive
systems can enhance human–system interaction.
The self-assessment is compiled in a survey as well as two easily accessible matrices, which depict how the
understanding and application of HCD principles can progress from a situation marked by uncertainty or
lack of awareness about the principles to a situation in which the principles are applied and validated in
full. The matrices are modelled after the quality management maturity grid (QMMG) developed by Philip B.
Crosby and first published in Reference [10].
The human-centred design assessment matrix is presented as a stand-alone element that can be used by all
concerned with design principles and processes and their outcome to elicit discussions about the benefits
of applying the human-centred design principles in the organization. While not as robust, complete, or
tailorable as an expert evaluator led assessment, the value is in speed and simplicity – there are fewer
than a dozen questions, and it is intended to be used as a self-assessment. The survey may be used directly
(answering the survey questions to perform an assessment) or by surveying a number of members of a
project team or organization. The matrices may be used to report and visualize the results of the survey-
based assessment, or as rapid assessments in their own right.
To align this assessment with other HCD-related standards and evaluator-led assessments, an explanation
is given about how the questions relate to documented HCD principles and how the situations described in
each cell relate to specified headings in three of the standards in the ISO 9241-200 series (ISO 9241-210,
ISO 9241-220, and ISO 9241-221).
5 How to use this document
The initiative to use this document can be based in a general interest in understanding the role of human-
computer interaction and human-centred design for enhancing the competitiveness and work environment
of the organization. The initiative can also be provoked by observed deficiencies in the design, deployment
and use of the systems serving the employees, partners and customers of the organization.
The actual use of the document can take on many forms, depending on the size of the organization, how
dependent it is on its core and ancillary systems, on the competencies of their users and on the maturity and
effectiveness of its oversight and support systems.
The following typical situations exemplify how the document may be used when the initiative to audit the
level of human-centred awareness in the organization is taken by a support department that has witnessed

some major flaws in individual systems, in how systems interact, or how systems can be used more
effectively:
— An employee responsible for evaluating and improving design practices disseminates the survey within
the organization and summarizes the results in order to recommend improvements in practice and the
human-centred design approach. This may be done for individual projects, or a larger portion of the
organization.
— A representative from a department organizes a workshop in which their colleagues individually read
and fill in their respective evaluations – “this is where we are” – row by row in the assessment matrix, as
a diagnostic.
— The discussion in the workshop leads to a common understanding that individual systems, the interplay
between some of the systems and the way these systems are used are worth closer investigation.
— Management initiates a broader use of the document in which the users in one or two work units are
invited to complete the HCD self-assessment survey, and a cross-unit view is created from the results.
— A work group is formed to assess the results from evaluations, to compare it with the result from the
original workshop, to track results over time, and to propose a set of next steps.
— A decision at an executive board meeting is taken that all board members fill in their respective
evaluations in the HCD self-assessment matrix for organizations.
This example series of situations illustrates an initial phase of how this document is intended to be used.
As noted, the actual use of the document will vary depending on many factors. The initiative to start
surveying the human-centredness can have been taken at the executive board level. The maturity of human-
centredness can be relatively high, such that the standard documents, which the assessment is based on,
have been used for some time. Evaluations may be in regular use in order to survey the economic and social
costs and benefits of applying human-centred design as a strategic asset in the organization.
6 Human-centred design self-assessment survey
6.1 General
6.1.1 Presentation
This clause contains an assessment of the human-centred design approach as a survey. This survey can be
filled out by an individual evaluator familiar with a project, team, or organization. Alternately, it can be
sent to a number of people on a team or in an organization, to judge maturity (by averaging or otherwise
evaluating the results) across the organization.
The survey is also presented as matrices of answers in Annex B (organizational questions and answers) and
Annex C (project-related questions and answers). Annex A is a set of instructions for completing the matrix-
based surveys in Annexes B and C.
6.1.2 ORG versus PROJ questions
The questions are in two sections: the first six questions (ORG 1 through ORG 6; Annex B) regard the
human-centred design approach in an organization (of any size; this can be a team, division, company).
The remaining five questions (PROJ 1 through PROJ 5; Annex C) regard human-centred design on projects.
Although the two sections can be used independently, it is recommended they be used in one of these ways:
a) Use all of the questions — About the organization and projects, answering the questions about projects
based on typical projects. The scope of the assessment is therefore the approach to human-centred
design in an organization.
b) Use all of the questions — About the organization and projects, answering the questions about projects
for each project in a cross-section of projects. The scope of the assessment is the approach to human-

centred design in an organization, with the ability to dive deeper into project performance or compare
projects against each other.
c) Use just the project-based questions, to evaluate one or more projects. The scope of the assessment in
this case will be the human-centred design approach of an individual project or projects.
6.1.3 Scoring an assessment
To score an assessment based on these questions, each answer can be given a score, with 0-5 points being
given for each question and an average calculated. It is recommended that questions ORG 1-6 be scored
separately from questions PROJ 1-5; this will provide a view of both the human-centred design approach at
an organization and projects within that organization.
Maturity models typically have six levels, and the 0-5 scoring used in this document is designed to align with
that. This standard does not include benchmark or target scores, but organizations are free to consider:
a) Setting target scores and considering the delta from measured scores to the targets. (Scores of 5
typically represent the organizations that are considered to be most mature and innovative with respect
to human-centred design, although you are free to tailor your target scores to scores other than “5”.)
b) Tracking scores over time, to see improvement (or decline) over the life of projects or to track desired
organizational change in a human-centred approach.
c) Focusing on the lowest scores, operating under the assumption that those indicate the areas for greatest
improvement and the highest return-on-investment (ROI) for change.
The remainder of this clause contains the self-assessment as a series of questions, divided into sections
for organizational assessment and project assessment. Each question includes instructions on selecting
an answer; the presumption is that each subsequent answer represents a higher level of maturity and
encompasses the previous (lower-numbered) answers.
6.2 Questions relating to human-centred design approach at an organization
6.2.1 Question: HCD in business strategy (ORG 1)
This question explores whether human-centred design is an explicit and integral part of an organization's
business strategy, and whether human-centred quality is measured.
Select the answer from Table 1 that most closely resembles the organization:
Table 1 — HCD in business strategy (ORG 1)
Level Answer
0 Human-centred success criteria have not been created for any projects.
1 Human-centred success criteria are created ad hoc for some projects.
2 Project-level HCD success criteria are defined for all projects, but not implemented
consistently.
3 Human-centred success criteria are implemented consistently across projects.
4 Performance against human-centred success criteria on typical projects is meas-
ured and results inform improvements to be made.
5 Organizational human-centred objectives and KPIs evolve based on project feedback
and broader trends among users and contexts of use.
Example considerations:
— Do you embrace a vision of human-centred design as a corporate asset?
— Do you promote a human-centred approach to system design, operation, and procurement?

— Are leaders committed to human-centred design at the executive level?
— Have you established and communicated a policy for achieving required levels of human-centred quality?
— Have you explicitly taken account of usability and human-centred quality in procurement?
6.2.2 Question: HCD as normal practice (ORG 2)
This question is asking whether human-centred design is accepted, established, integrated, and maintained
as normal practice in the organization.
Select the answer from Table 2 that most closely resembles your organization:
Table 2 — HCD as normal practice (ORG 2)
Level Answer
0 Culture of HCD is not present throughout organization.
1 Awareness of HCD exists at most or all levels of the organization.
2 A member of the organization's management team or board has been designated to
advocate for and support human-centred design.
3 Policies for achieving desired levels of human-centred quality are established and
communicated.
4 Level of maturity is regularly measured against published policies for HCD.
5 A program of continuous improvement for human-centred quality is followed.
Example considerations:
— Have you ensured acceptance of human-centred activities in the organization?
— Have you established and maintained awareness of the importance of human-centred quality?
— Have you established and communicated a policy for achieving required levels of human-centred quality?
— Have you applied human-centred design in the development of interactive systems?
— Do you include review and sign-off of human-centred quality in reviews and decisions?
— Is Human-Centred Design part of the organization’s everyday vocabulary?
— Are other methodologies aligned with HCD principles (such as Design Thinking and Lean UX) part of the
organization’s everyday vocabulary?
— What kind of process audits are you using? Are they independent, or self-audits?
6.2.3 Question: Integration with system development (ORG 3)
This question is asking whether there is a well-defined and documented human-centred design process that
is used consistently for all of your projects.
Select the answer from Table 3 that most closely resembles your organization:

Table 3 — Integration with system development (ORG 3)
Level Answer
0 There is no HCD process or shared methods documented.
1 There is a common HCD process shared by some but not all programs; process docu-
mentation is incomplete.
2 Procedures are defined and documented to integrate HCD with other system devel-
opment activities.
3 The integration of HCD into interactive system design is established, communicated,
and monitored and relevant stakeholders are involved.
4 HCD is part of the systems development process for all interactive systems. Costs
and benefits of particular HCD activities and the risks mitigated are known.
5 HCD quality objectives transcend the organization and are included when working
with external vendors and related activities (such as procurement and marketing).
Example considerations:
— Do you select, publish, review and maintain HCD procedures, tools and methods?
— Is human-centred design integrated into the overall system development project plan?
— Do you tailor methods as they are applied to a variety of project types, timelines, and team composition?
— Do you ensure effective communication between those responsible for HCD and other members of project
teams?
6.2.4 Question: Resources and infrastructure (ORG 4)
This question is asking: Are there sufficient qualified people recruited, staffed, and given responsibility and
authority to implement human-centred design? Is there training and mentoring on human-centred design
competencies available and regularly utilized? Are there tools and templates – digital and non-digital –
available to standardize the use of HCD methods across the organization?
Select the answer from Table 4 that most closely resembles your organization:
Table 4 — Resources and Infrastructure (ORG 4)
Level Answer
0 There is no established budget or plan to provide the needed people, processes and
tools to projects.
1 HCD activities are carried out, but with minimal support in terms of budget, people,
or tools.
2 Budget, staff, and tools are available, but not suitably complete, competent, or allo-
cated for all programs and projects.
3 Sufficient competent staff, budget, tools, templates, and HCD guidelines are availa-
ble.
4 The infrastructure for HCD is actively maintained and promoted. Design and usabil-
ity guidelines, standards, and styleguides are selected and published.
5 Tools, templates, and budget are regularly evaluated and improved. Staff are trained
and mentored for continual improvement. Tools are customized where needed.
Knowledge is reused across the organization.
Example considerations:
— Are hiring goals and standards set, to ensure sufficient staff competent in HCD are hired?
— Do you identify and integrate HCD experts into project teams?
— Do you ensure qualified people are staffed in relevant positions in the organization?

— Do experts have sufficient authority to implement proper HCD practice?
— Are required competences defined for HCD and appropriate assessment methods used to measure
competency?
— Do you establish training to reach and maintain required competences in HCD?
— Do you ensure that staff are competent to apply selected procedures, tools and methods?
— Are trained individuals mentored and monitored to ensure that competence is effectively applied?
— How do you ensure individuals are progressing and can see their progress in their practice of HCD?
— Are digital and non-digital tools made available for HCD practitioners across the organization?
— Have you agreed on a set of HCD procedures, tools and methods representing accepted practice?
— Do you promote and maintain the infrastructure for HCD (procedures, tools, methods)?
— Have you selected, published and maintained design and usability (style) guidelines and standards?
— Do you provide guidance on selecting, adapting and applying individual HCD tools and methods?
— Are research operations formalized, with processes for insight curation and sharing across teams?
— Are research operations mature, with centralized, maintained research repositories, insight management
practices, and knowledge reuse across the organization?
6.2.5 Question: Governance and performance (ORG 5)
This question is asking whether there is a governance process to regularly assess programs, projects, and
teams and to continuously improve performance with respect to HCD.
Select the answer from Table 5 that most closely resembles your organization:
Table 5 — Governance and performance (ORG 5)
Level Answer
0 Human-centred quality standards have not been defined.
1 Quality standards are defined but performance against HCD standards is not com-
pletely known.
2 There is some review of human-centred quality.
3 There are KPIs set for human-centred quality and HCD.
4 Performance against KPIs for human-centred quality is known at the project and
organizational level.
5 A governance process is in place to assess and improve HCD capability and KPIs for
human-centred quality.
Example considerations:
— Have you established a governance process to manage conformance with agreed HCD standards?
— Do you take corrective action when deficiencies in human-centred quality are identified?
— Have you defined organization-wide objectives for use of human-centred design methods?
— Do you regularly assess projects regarding use of best HCD practice?

6.2.6 Question: Introduction, operation, upgrade, and end of life of systems (ORG 6)
This question is asking whether there are human-centred design practices used during introduction,
support, maintenance, and disposal or retirement of systems.
Select the answer from Table 6 that most closely resembles your organization:
Table 6 — Introduction, operation, upgrade, and end of life of systems (ORG 6)
Level Answer
0 Human-centred design is not considered as part of introduction, operation, or end of
life of systems.
1 Some HCD activities are considered throughout some of the components of systems,
for some aspects of the lifecycle.
2 Some HCD activities are included throughout most of the lifecycle stages of systems.
3 A human-centred design process is used throughout system introduction, opera
...