Thank you!
Your submission has been received!
Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
I map the journey end to end — actions, decisions, the moments people give up — and tie it to instrumentation so it stays honest. A journey map nobody checks against data becomes decoration within a month.
You know where people sign up and where they churn, but not what happens between. Different teams own different parts of the experience and nobody owns the whole. There's a drop-off in the funnel that analytics shows but nobody can explain. Or you have a journey map already — made in a workshop two years ago, never checked against data, now decoration on a wall.
I map the real path rather than the intended one: actions, decisions, the moments people hesitate, and the points where they quietly give up.
Then I tie it to instrumentation. A journey map that nobody checks against behaviour becomes fiction within a month. Every stage should have a number attached, even a rough one.
I include the parts outside the product — the marketing promise that set the expectation, the onboarding email that arrived too late, the support conversation that saved or lost the account. Most journey failures happen in the seams between teams, not inside any one screen.
The output is a map with the friction ranked, so it goes into a backlog rather than onto a wall.
Two to three weeks. Longer where several teams own different stages, since most of the work is getting them to agree on what actually happens.
How is this different from a funnel analysis?
A funnel tells you where people leave. A journey map tells you why, and includes the parts your analytics can't see.
Do you need our analytics access?
It helps considerably. Without it the map rests on interviews alone, which is workable but less precise.
We already have personas. Do we need this too?
Personas describe who. Journeys describe what happens. The second is where the fixable problems live.