Büssow and Baumgarten (2005)demonstrate the importance of process evaluation by qouting that “Analysing logistic systems and improving them continuously is a fundamental competitive factor, which can generate significant competitive advantages for businesses, if it is mastered”. Therefore, this thesis deals with new ways to assess processes. The objective of the thesis is a description of the actual used methods of process evaluation, which provides a theoretical overview. Additionally, concepts known from the information technology CMM and COBIT are analysed, and the suitability for the general process management is examined. The eligibility of the two procedures for the use for organisations outside of the IT-industry is examined and evaluated in this thesis. The main part contains a presentation of the concepts of CMM and COBIT. After the description of the concepts and the foundations, the sequence of the methods is shown. Afterwards, a conversion of the particular method to a procedure for the gen-eral process management is performed. By comparing several points of CMM and COBIT with the process management as well as by changing the processes from spe-cific to general valuation and by dropping various procedures of the method a gen-erally valid set of rules is created. To ensure, that CMM and COBIT are suited to evalu-ate processes an assessment scheme which contains the most common issues in pro-cess management, is created. Additionally, the into general process management transformed methods are tested and rated with a process from the operational praxis. After the completion of these previous tasks, obtained methods of process assessment are evaluated. The CMM shows good generalisation ability to a sustainable process valuation method, but the use of the procedure is most suitable for organisations which run a business that deals with project-related services. COBIT provides an exten-sive set of rules for process evaluation but has no clear guidelines on how the assess-ment needs to be done. The conclusion is that each of the two procedures, if they are used because of their strengths and weaknesses for the suitable usage, have a good foundation for process evaluation and improvement.