I heartily endorse Chris’ advice.toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
There is no such thing as a "standard baseline" for KM, nor are there standard maturity markers. How could there be, if KM itself is by nature so context sensitive?
There is no one size fits all KM in the real world. There is only KM that fits the challenges, needs and opportunities of your present context. So where a maturity model (I prefer capability framework) works at all, it is about characterising your current position in relation to needs, challenges, opportunities and strategic goals, identifying where you want to get to, and identifying capabilities that need to grow.
Maturity model descriptors can be mined from multiple sources, selected and used where relevant, but this needs to be a participatory process from within the organisation. You can use a technique such as the River Diagram technique to assess current capability gaps and capability goals, and then you can build out progress markers.
There are other issues with maturity models as well. When applied across a large organisation they tend to “flatten out” (i.e. average out) interesting and useful differences in KM capabilities across the organisation, thus concealing them. Those differences are your opportunities to transfer capabilities internally, so you’re not doing yourselves any favours by concealing them in the process. Maturity models should be handled with great care! More on this at