PMS and property management
18 % · base weight5 questions · Reservations, billing, connectivity and data flows.
The PMS is the operational foundation. Coherent integrations reduce duplicate entry and make data usable by other tools.
Two assessments, two levels of depth
The free scan and the complete audit answer different questions. Their scores are not interchangeable.
Free scan: visible signals
We analyse publicly accessible elements and technically detectable tools on your website. This preview provides an initial view of your digital presence. It cannot verify internal processes or how you actually use your software.
Complete audit: operational maturity
The complete score uses questionnaire answers and your property profile. It also explores integrations, management practices and organisation. Public data provides context without replacing your answers.
Our framework goes beyond “do you have this tool?”. Depending on the question, answers distinguish absence, basic use, deeper integration or structured practices. Each option has its own wording and a value from 0 to 3: its precise meaning depends on the question.
The eight pillars
The pillars follow a hotel’s value chain: manage inventory, sell, optimise revenue, build loyalty, deliver the stay, collect payments, govern and automate. The weights below are base weights, before profile adjustments.
Distribution and direct sales
18 % · base weight5 questions · Channel manager, booking engine, channels and distribution balance.
Selling rooms is not enough: controlling availability and channel mix affects margins and dependence on intermediaries.
Revenue management
18 % · base weight5 questions · Pricing, performance data and optimisation practices.
The value of revenue management also depends on turning data into pricing decisions, not simply having software.
Guest experience and CRM
13 % · base weight5 questions · Guest data, communication, personalisation and loyalty.
Data that is collected but never activated does not create a guest relationship. We examine practices supporting the experience and future bookings.
Internal operations
9 % · base weight5 questions · Housekeeping, maintenance, coordination, POS and additional activities.
Technology should support teams. The scope varies with explicitly declared restaurant, spa or event activities.
Payments and finance
4 % · base weight2 questions · Digital collection and payment card data protection.
A low weight does not mean low risk. A foundational gap can cap the pillar; PCI-DSS and fraud prevention are distinct from GDPR.
Technology strategy and governance
10 % · base weight7 questions · Tool selection, budgeting, deployment and management.
An effective stack needs direction: priorities, resources and adoption by teams. Governance prevents tools from remaining underused.
AI and automation
10 % · base weight5 questions · Artificial intelligence use and process automation.
We place these practices in the wider operation. They do not replace sound data, integrations and business practices.
From answers to score
The score is deterministic: identical answers and profile produce the same result under the same method version. It is not a discretionary grade assigned by AI.
- 1
Retain relevant answers
Applicable questions are identified from declared activities and previous answers. Skipped or unanswered questions are excluded from the denominator. A pillar without any retained answer nevertheless scores 0.
- 2
Normalise each pillar to 100
Retained values are added, divided by their possible maximum and rounded. Fictional example: five answers totalling 10 out of 15 points give a pillar score of 67/100, before any cap.
- 3
Apply criticality caps
Some foundations cannot be offset by stronger answers elsewhere in the same pillar. An answer of 0 to Q1 caps PMS at 30, Q6 caps distribution at 35, and Q26 caps payments at 30. A cap applies only if the score exceeds it.
- 4
Weight and interpret
Pillar scores are multiplied by their effective weights, added and rounded to a whole number. The level summarises measured maturity, not overall hotel quality or guest satisfaction.
- 0–30
- Foundations to build
- 31–55
- Developing practices
- 56–75
- Advanced maturity
- 76–100
- High maturity
A model adapted to your hotel
A 25-room hotel does not operate with the same resources as a 200-room property with a restaurant and meeting rooms. Adjustments change relative pillar importance, not answer values.
Property size
Below 50 rooms: PMS +2, distribution +2, CRM +3; revenue −4, strategy −2, operations −1. From 100 rooms: revenue +3, operations +3, strategy +2; PMS −4, CRM −2, distribution −2. Between 50 and 99 rooms: no size adjustment.
Activity mix
Restaurant (F&B) example: operations +3, payments +1, PMS −2, distribution −2. Spa and meetings and events (MICE) have their own adjustments. Multiple activities combine their effects.
Target market
Leisure example: distribution +2, CRM +2, PMS −2, operations −2. Business guests also affect revenue, payments and strategy weights. A mixed market remains neutral.
These are percentage points added to or subtracted from base weights, not score points. After combining effects, each weight has a minimum of 2 before normalisation to 100 and rounding to one decimal. Effective weights appear in the report. Defaults and applicability rules are detailed below.
From findings to actions
A score describes a situation; a priority should support a decision. We separate action ranking from financial estimates.
Priorities: gap, importance and diversity
Up to three actions are selected from answers below 3, using the effective pillar weight and a bonus for the two weakest pillars. Different pillars are preferred, without duplicates. A POS recommendation requires explicitly declared F&B or spa activities.
Missed revenue: a scenario, not an observation
The estimate combines approximate annual room revenue with a score-linked leakage rate. Low, central and high estimates make uncertainty visible. Room count, average rate and occupancy assumptions must be read alongside amounts. This is neither an accounting forecast nor a sum of promised gains per action.
Sources: different levels of evidence
Recommendations may draw on an internal benchmark, a study, a business estimate or a qualitative assessment. The report distinguishes these sources. A badge does not turn an estimate into a demonstrated result for your hotel.
An explicit method with acknowledged limitations
Local benchmark
Two distinct panels: completed audit scores excluding demos, internal traffic and consultancies; technically detected tool adoption in real free scans, including prospecting. One hotel per domain, latest result retained. Minimum 10 hotels: city, country, then overall fallback. If the score panel remains insufficient, GROOM 2024 reference: 47 BE/FR/CH hotels, average 51/100. No historical adoption rate is invented. At each level, type and room band are used when at least 10 hotels match, otherwise the panel is widened. These fields are recorded only when available. Detection does not establish the presence or absence of every tool. Aggregates are refreshed daily.
Self-reported data and visibility
The questionnaire depends on accurate answers. The scan cannot see your entire stack: a tool not detected is not necessarily absent. The audit is not a technical, security or compliance certification.
Comparability
Size, profile, retained answers and method version matter when interpreting a score. Available panels are not statistically representative of the entire hotel market.
Traceability and review
The method carries a version and review date. Scoring rules, caps, estimates and priorities have automated tests. Method changes must be versioned; this page documents the current version without recalculating existing reports.
Detailed calculation rules
Explore the current method in depth: formulas, thresholds, defaults and selection rules.
View the exact rules
General principle
v1.2 · 2026-10. 39 scored questions across 8 pillars: PMS, Distribution, Revenue, CRM, Operations, Payments, Strategy, AI & Automation. Q40 is open-ended and unscored. The number of questions asked depends on the profile and answers.
Score calculation
Each answer is worth 0, 1, 2 or 3. Each pillar: round(sum of retained answers / (3 × number of retained answers) × 100). Missing answers and skipped questions are excluded; a pillar with no retained answers scores 0. Caps when the answer is 0: Q1 → PMS 30/100; Q6 → Distribution 35/100; Q26 → Payments 30/100, only if the score exceeds the cap. The overall score is the weighted sum of pillar scores, rounded to a whole number. Levels: BASIC 0–30, EMERGING 31–55, ADVANCED 56–75, EXPERT 76–100.
Base weights and adjustments
PMS 18 % · Distribution 18 % · Revenue 18 % · CRM 13 % · Operations 9 % · Payments 4 % · Strategy 10 % · AI & Automation 10 %. Total: 100%. Weights adjust for size, F&B/Spa/MICE activities and target market. Adjusted weights have a minimum of 2 before normalization to 100 and rounding to one decimal (the rounded total may differ slightly from 100). Missing size: M; missing market: neutral Mixed; missing activity mix: all activity questions retained. Effective weights appear in the report.
Missed revenue: indicative estimate
Annual room revenue = round(rooms × 365 × ADR × occupancy / 100). Central leakage rate (%) = 9 − 0.08 × score clamped to 0–100, rounded to one decimal (1–9%). Range: ±2 percentage points, minimum 0.5% and maximum 15%. Each amount = round(revenue × rate / 100). Rooms: <20 → 15; 20–49 → 35; 50–99 → 75; 100–199 → 150; 200+ → 250; missing → 75. Entered ADR or default: resort €180, boutique €150, city/business €120, apartment €95, hostel €70, other €110. Entered occupancy or 65%, clamped to 20–95%. Basis: entered, mixed or estimated depending on ADR and occupancy availability. These assumptions are not observed actual losses.
Priorities and limitations
Up to 3 actions for answers below 3: (3 − answer) × effective pillar weight × bonus 2 for the two weakest pillars (1 otherwise). Missing, skipped or inapplicable questions excluded; POS only with explicitly declared F&B or Spa. Pillar diversity preferred, without duplicates. GROOM 2024 benchmark: 47 independent hotels in BE/FR/CH, average 51/100; non-representative convenience sample. Public data adds context, but the score uses answers and the profile. Impacts are indicative, not guarantees; see report source badges.