Research foundation
The maturity model came out of doctoral research, not a consulting framework
OMMMICX is the applied version of the final chapter of a doctoral thesis: a systematic review of 50 peer-reviewed studies, qualitative research with 24 practitioners, and a validation study with eight CX, technology and marketing managers across four organizations.
The gap we filled
Why did the field need another maturity model?
Before this work there was no maturity model for omnichannel customer experience management backed by academic research. What existed covered only parts of the problem.
No academic self-assessment instrument
There is a growing body of empirical work on omnichannel CX dimensions and on the barriers to integration, yet no academically validated self-assessment framework for omnichannel CX management had been proposed to date.
Consulting frameworks have a partial scope
Forrester's omnichannel maturity assessment (2020) delivers operational value, but covers three areas only: digital customer experience, digital operational excellence and omnichannel customer engagement. Other frameworks assess a single dimension, such as retail supply chains.
Adjacent academic models ignore the customer journey
Academic maturity models in adjacent domains address digital transformation broadly or Industry 4.0, not the customer journey as the unifying approach of the assessment.
How it was built
From 50 papers and 24 practitioners to 8 dimensions and 60 criteria
There are two common paths to building a maturity model: starting from existing literature, or starting from expert knowledge. This model combines both, integrating a systematic literature review with a qualitative study with practitioners.
01
Systematic literature review
Fifty peer-reviewed journal articles and conference proceedings including the keywords omnichannel and experience (in all variants: customer experience, user experience, consumer experience) that empirically researched these aspects. Guiding question: what are the elements of omnichannel customer experience management?
02
Criteria extraction
Criteria — the variables actually researched — were extracted from every study. If a study found that brand familiarity affects customer experience, both variables enter the map as criteria. Nothing was added by intuition: every criterion traces back to a researched variable.
03
Qualitative research with practitioners
Eleven individual in-depth interviews and group sessions with thirteen practitioners working in telecommunications, banking, insurance, retail, airlines, education and consultancy, across two exploratory phases: one before the COVID-19 pandemic and one during it. The goal was to understand the real transition from a multichannel to an omnichannel approach, with its enablers and challenges.
04
Grouping through concept mapping
Criteria were visually organized on a Miro board using concept mapping, a method that helps make sense of information and identify interconnections between areas. Duplicates and synonyms were then merged (for example, customization and personalization) and criteria unrelated to customer experience management were removed.
05
Eight dimensions emerge
Each resulting theme became a dimension of the model, with its associated criteria. The eight dimensions emerged inductively and were retained because each represents a distinct, non-redundant area of organizational capability. The mapping was carried out by one researcher and reviewed by a second one for validation.
The 8 dimensions
Why these eight and not others
Business strategy is the foundational dimension: if omnichannel is not a strategic decision, no other decision holds. The other seven areas must align with that strategy. Each dimension groups criteria the organization must meet when they are relevant to its context.
Scoring and levels
Why six levels, and how the score is calculated
The result is not a qualitative label: it is a percentage of compliance across the criteria assessed.
Sixty items, each rated on a 4-point Likert scale (0–3): the maximum possible is 180 points.
The score is the percentage of the total possible points. An organization scoring 90 out of 180 obtains 50%, placing it at the Multichannel level.
Score ranges were defined through equal-interval partitioning, consistent with dominant practice in maturity model design.
The six-level structure aligns with established references: the Nielsen Norman Group UX Maturity Model (2021), the CMMI continuous representation with its six capability levels, and Industry 4.0-MM, which adopts six levels per dimension.
Criteria that do not apply to your context (for example, physical-goods logistics in a service company) are excluded from the calculation so comparisons stay fair.
| Level | Score range | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Non-existent | 0–17% | Customer interactions are not articulated, and there is no organisational commitment to or prioritisation of omnichannel. |
| Emerging | 18–33% | Interactions are barely joined up, with significant gaps across most of the dimensions that enable omnichannel customer experience management. |
| Multichannel | 34–50% | Some contact channels may be connected, but experience management still happens in silos: channels operate in isolation. |
| Transitioning to omnichannel | 51–66% | Channels are integrated, though not fully. Some interactions are managed beyond the individual channel. Reaching omnichannel depends on how each dimension is prioritised. |
| Managed omnichannel | 67–83% | There is a clear organisational commitment to omnichannel experience management. Data is integrated and interactions are orchestrated at customer level. |
| Optimised omnichannel | 84–100% | Customer relationships are managed on top of a people-centred culture. Decisions rely on integrated, holistic customer data, enabling real-time feedback and continuous improvement. |
Industry validation
The model was tested with the people meant to use it
To test the model and the diagnostic tool, eight participants — CX, technology and marketing managers — were recruited from four organizations. In sessions of 45 to 60 minutes the model was presented, the questionnaire was completed dimension by dimension with room for open feedback, and validity, suitability and willingness to use were measured with questions adapted from previous research.
9.5/10
stated likelihood of using the model in practice
9.6/10
likelihood of recommending it
87.5
Net Promoter Score of the tool
What the model does not claim to be
The validation used a small, homogeneous sample: eight participants from four organizations in a Latin American context, concentrated in banking, insurance and telecommunications. Like any self-assessment, it carries a degree of subjectivity. The score is descriptive rather than inferential: it surfaces gaps and structures the team conversation instead of producing statistically derived conclusions. Until a large-scale, multi-country validation is conducted, the model is best understood as a structured starting point for self-assessment and gap identification.
Who is behind it
Carmen Gerea
Doctor in Engineering Sciences from Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, with a thesis devoted to omnichannel customer experience. Her doctoral work includes an integrative review of the omnichannel CX field, a study on the transition from multichannel to omnichannel in service-based companies, and the maturity model behind this tool. Research carried out with a research stay at Professor Marta Frasquet's department at the University of Valencia.
Frequently asked questions
Questions about the origin of the model
Apply the model to your organization
Free for one individual assessment. Takes 10–12 minutes.
Assess my organization