+44(0)1689 258 210 | enquiries@e-focusmarketing.com
- CRM Strategy Solutions
- Our CRM Methodology
- CRM Resources
- Supper Club
- Contact
+44(0)1689 258 210 | enquiries@e-focusmarketing.com
Execution Excellence is the third of the six capabilities in the Customer Relationship Maturity Model (CRMM), developed by Kate Barrett of eFocus Marketing, and the second in the Grow stage. It measures how consistently an organisation delivers CRM activity and how well it makes individual customer decisions at the point of delivery: which message, to which customer, through which channel, and when.
It is the capability most teams score themselves highest on and the one audits most often mark down, because consistency is easy to assume when the same two people have run every send for three years.
The question the CRMM asks is what happens when one of them is on holiday, and whether a customer who bought last week gets the same email as one who has not bought in a year.
Two threads run through this capability and your score reflects both of them together. The first is reliability: does your activity go out right, on time, to the right segment, with the right links, without depending on one person remembering the step that always gets missed?
The second is decision quality at the individual level: when one of your customers receives something, was that decided by their actual context (what they bought, when, how they have behaved since) or by the segment somebody filed them under two years ago?
How many of your last twenty sends had an error that reached customers? How many were caught only because a particular person happened to check? And how many customers got a message that made no sense given what they did last week?
Those three answers place most organisations at Level 2, and there is nothing shameful in that (it is where a documented process meets the reality of a busy week), but the gap between Level 2 and Level 3 is where most of the commercial value in this capability sits.
The CRM Priority Check asks one question about this capability, with five statements describing how reliably activity goes out and how well individual decisions are made. The levels below describe the evidence at each point.
Delivery is inconsistent and depends on individual effort. Customers largely receive the same experience regardless of who they are or what they have done, because there is no logic deciding otherwise.
A defined process and documented business rules exist, but consistency still depends on individuals following them, and personalisation extends to segment-level variation rather than individual context. The process is real; the adherence is variable.
Quality does not depend on who happens to be doing the work. Delivery is consistently reliable, and decisions reference each customer’s individual context rather than just the segment or channel they belong to.
Execution is continuously coordinated and quality is proactively assured before anything reaches a customer. AI-assisted decisioning actively trades off channel, offer, content and timing together for each interaction rather than deciding each factor separately.
The organisation could lose any single person, including its most experienced, without execution quality or decision quality dropping, and both continue to improve rather than merely holding steady.
At Level 1, do not try to fix both threads at once. Pick the single activity you send most often (a regular newsletter, a standard journey step), write down the steps someone actually follows to deliver it in the order they really happen, then add one deliberate rule (even something as basic as new versus existing customer) so it stops treating everyone the same by default.
At Level 2, find the quality check most likely to be skipped when things are busy and make it a hard step rather than a reminder: a sign-off, a checklist that has to be ticked before something can send. Separately, take your largest segment and split it on the variable that actually varies within it (recency or value are the easiest starting points) so decisioning gets one level more precise before you scale the effort.
At Level 3, document the reasoning behind your most common decisions, not just the outcome. When both consistency and personalisation live in one or two heads, your capability is fragile, and written logic is what lets someone else run it and what lets you defend a decision when someone asks why a customer got what they got.
At Level 4, build a weekly or monthly routine that samples the decisions your system made and asks whether a person would have made the same call, so a mis-weighted variable is caught before it has shaped thousands of interactions.
At Level 5, test the claim rather than assume it: run a planned delivery cycle with your most experienced person absent and check what happens to consistency and decision quality. If either dips, you have found where capability still depends on a person.
Execution Excellence is capability three of six in the Customer Relationship Maturity Model and the second in the Grow stage. It delivers the CRM Strategy, against the lifecycle set out in Customer Progression Design, and it is bounded by what Technology and Enablement allows.
Whether execution is actually improving outcomes is a Measurement question; whether the decisions inside it are the right ones is an Optimisation question.
When this scores lowest in a CRM Priority Check it is flagged as the capability to fix first. CRM Execution support is the engagement that builds it.
Reliability is half of it, and QA is one mechanism for reliability. The other half is decision quality: whether what each of your customers receives was decided by their own context. A programme with flawless QA that sends the same email to everyone scores Level 2 at best.
Only if the variable driving it is individual behaviour rather than a static attribute. Swapping a hero image by gender or region is segment-level variation (Level 2). Changing what is sent, and whether it is sent at all, based on what this customer did in the last 30 days is individual context (Level 3).
Look at your last three errors that reached customers and who was away when they happened. Then look at your last three that were caught and who caught them. If the same name appears in both lists, the capability lives with that person rather than with the process.
Level 4 as defined does involve AI-assisted decisioning trading off channel, offer, content and timing together, because that is what continuous coordination at scale looks like in practice. Most organisations should be aiming for a solid Level 3 first; AI layered on top of inconsistent execution accelerates the inconsistency.
Every time I have looked at it, the hard gate on the most-skipped check. It costs nothing, it is in place within a week, and it usually removes the category of error your customers were seeing most, the one that was doing the most reputational damage. The decisioning work takes longer and pays back more, but the gate is where I would start.
Free Peak Readiness Assessment
Answer 22 questions to get your readiness score, your sharpest gap with three actions to take this week, and a to-do list for before, during and after the peak.
Start my free assessmentFree. A few minutes. Black Friday is on 27 November 2026, so the sooner you know, the more you can fix.