You are as likely to encounter a meta-process to qualify processes as you are likely to create a perpetual motion system to generate energy.
Process is a reaction to prior stupidity
In other words a process is the natural organisation of individuals to function as a team towards a common goal.
Now, this, as you have stated, does not mean the process is "good". The difficult part here is to evaluate what constitutes a good process. Towards this end everyone will have a different opinion each shedding light on a different aspect or trying to eliminate a specific bottleneck.
A good process is one that ensure a set of goals are attained. To determine what a good process for you would be like you have to first determine what aspects you wish to optimize and what aspects can be compromised towards this goal. The purist would attempt to create the ideal process that satisfies all possible goals but this is a false goal as many are contradictory by nature and cannot be reconciled. Therefore compromises are not only desirable but a necessity.
Possible goals for software production are :
- Product Quality
- Deterministic Defect Control
- Code Quality
- Optimizing team member interactions
The list goes on. Once you know what you want to optimize you can design a means to ensure these goals are met. To help you many processes have been created and used that address one or more of these but always to the detriment of another. A good process will identify what will be optimized AND what will be detrimentally affected. An excellent process will be able to quantify them.
For example Cleanroom Software Engineering will yields guaranteed levels of defects and closely control changes made to a system. BUT the costs of producing zero defects software will be prohibitive all but the most extreme situations where interventions when deployed are extremely difficult or impossible (deep space probes come to mind).
Some process will emphasize documentation, others will ensure regular incremental deliveries.
Process is Software
My best advice to this problem is to think of the process much as you think of a software system. Both attempt to solve a problem through algorithmic solutions. Just like software you need to create a model of the different actors and systems. You need to identify what the process must produce. Just like software you will need means to measure how this process is performing and carefully craft measure points in your system. And just like software you need to constantly analyse and evaluate these measurements keeping in mind that all forms of measurements will yield an incomplete picture of the whole and must constantly be adjusted and thus must never taken at face value.
Your biggest challenge is the fact that your actors are not deterministic algorithms or services but humans with different experience, educations and views as to what constitutes a good software.
ISO quality meta-processes attempt just that but to achieve this properly they are made voluntarily vague and incomplete. Their goal is to ensure your process contains enough information and measurement points to evolve with time towards your chosen goals.
When creating CMMI Carnegie Mellon has chosen a specific set of goals and created a process that attempt to achieve them.
best of luck in your findings, I would greatly appreciate if you could share back to this question what you have found to address your problem.