Having worked on both sides of developer relations, here are some thoughts about different levels of maturity for developer relations.

LEVEL 0: No developer relations

No internal effort is made to promote the platform, support developers, or capture their feedback.

LEVEL 1: Informal

No official developer relations staff or programme, but some developer relations handled by other functions. PR may be promoting the platform, business development may be partnering with and supporting developers.

LEVEL 2: High-touch

High-touch, often stealthy, relations with prized partners (i.e. large, established, companies or those with sufficient resources to build showcases for new features). This is a “don’t call us, we’ll call you” outreach which may entail the platform providing funding or direct technical capability to build out the integration, and often working with as-yet unannounced technology so it can be launched with a set of poster-child applications.

LEVEL 3: Evangelism

Promoting, explaining, and supporting the platform at scale via conferences, partnerships, and online media. Proactive efforts to recruit large amounts of developers to use the platform.

LEVEL 4: Advocacy

A 2-way relationship in which the platform’s own staff sees themselves as not just advocating for the platform, but as advocating for developers using the platform. With this mindset, developer relations plays an active role in feeding back real-world bugs and feature requests, and building supporting tools to improve the developer experience.

LEVEL 5: Quantified

Metrics-driven approach in which the return-on-investment for developer relations is understood and outreach efforts are able to quantified, both with high-touch partners and at scale.

Now some caveats about this.

First, how not to use this model. Any maturity model immediately makes you think companies should be ascending to the top level, but that is not the case and not the intention here. Ascending comes at a cost that may not be justified; clearly, a pure platform company (e.g. Twilio, Stripe) has a lot more incentive to get to the top than a product company with an experimental “labs” API, for example. There is financial cost, additional risks, and distraction to the rest of the organisation; all that needs to be weighed up. The purpose of this model, then, is to provide useful labels to facilitate these kinds of decisions. Not to imply one is intrinsically better than another.

So the way to actually use this model is simply to be true to yourself. Where are you now and where do you want to be? If you’re happy at level zero, scale any devrel back. If you want to shoot for level 5, start ramping up. Companies often differ widely between official and actual practices. A company may have no official developer relations programme, but instead have a technical marketing team or a super-engaged developer team who perform the same function. Likewise, no amount of fancy business cards will compensate for a developer relations programme that doesn’t develop and rarely relates. Hopefully, this model helps people to understand where they’re at.

Final caveat: Turns out you can’t pigeonhole a complex organisation into a simple number rating. The lines will blur when applying these definitions to $YOUR_FAVORITE_EXAMPLE. You may apply these definitions to a whole company, a single division, or a single product.

(Updated same day: moved maturity levels to top of article)