The X-Interviews | The BIG LIE of Journeys

Interview #18 - Graham Hill on Customer Journey Mapping and Orchestration

Graham Hill on Journey Maps and Orchestration

Today on The X-Mentor we’re chatting with Graham Hill (AKA “Dr. G”). With over 30 years of experience, Graham has led transformative business projects across sectors including telecoms, financial services, automotive, and aviation. As the founder of Janus SPV, he has driven complex business transformation initiatives for high-profile clients such as Toyota, Vodafone, PayPal, and Lufthansa. Graham's expertise in customer experience and marketing operations drives innovation in service design, CRM, and customer loyalty. He has held senior consultancy roles with top firms like PwC and KPMG.

In this X-Interview, Graham offers an in-depth exploration of journey mapping's evolution, its current state, and future trends, particularly in relation to customer experience (CX). He traces journey mapping back to the 1980s, starting with service blueprinting, and describes how journey maps initially provided a way to visualize customer interactions and backstage operations.

However, Hill argues that most journey maps today are overly simplistic and linear, failing to capture the complexity of real customer experiences. Graham emphasizes that journey maps often misrepresent customer realities, which are far more dynamic and non-linear, with thousands of possible journeys for even a single product or service. He describes this as “The Big Lie” of journey mapping, where companies build experiences based on idealized, internally driven assumptions rather than true customer behavior. Many journey maps, he asserts, are created without actual customer involvement, and are often used to serve business goals rather than customer needs.

Graham calls for a transformation in how companies understand and interact with customers. By moving from simplistic journey maps to data-driven, dynamic journey analytics and orchestration, businesses can better serve their customers, leading to improved outcomes and greater alignment with customer needs.

The Big Lie

The X-Mentor: Graham Hill, welcome to the X-Mentor! Let’s dive right in and talk about journey mapping—where it started, where it is today, and where it’s headed in the near future. You recently posted an article on LinkedIn about some flaws in journey mapping, calling it Journey Mapping’s BIG LIE.

Could you briefly explain what journey mapping is and why it's become such a popular tool?

Graham: Thank you, Greg. Yes, I drew my first journey map in the 1980s. A long, long time ago. In fact, it wasn't really a journey map, but it was the journey elements that were there in the form of a service blueprint. The service blueprinting goes back a long time to the work of J. Kingman-Brundage, The ABC’s of Service System Blueprinting, followed by Bitner, Ostrom & Morgan, Service Blueprinting: A Practical Technique of Service Innovation, and more recently Christian Grönroos, Service Management and Marketing: Managing the Service Profit Logic.  You had this great mental model way of thinking about interactions and series of interactions or episodes and journeys. And experiences that come out as a result of that, and you need a way to map those things. But there's no point just mapping the journey in those days. You needed to map all the things that go on in the background below the line of visibility that enable the journey to be carried out and for customers get whatever it is they need.

Journey maps are quite a useful tool, but not in the way it's used often today. From my perspective, I've seen hundreds of journey maps, literally hundreds of journey maps and drawn quite a few myself over the years. What I see is that they are a relatively simplistic and representative view of how the world is for customers. Usually, a linear view for an A → B → C → D, no going backwards, no dipping out cells and coming back in at the point, no starting in the middle. Etcetera.

The challenge that I see, which was the highlight of the ‘BIG LIE’ of Journey mapping article, was if you look at what real customers really do to get their jobs done and to go on their journeys, there are many, many thousands of different journeys. And so, if there are thousands of journeys out there, we see those journeys falling in a long tail distribution, so there's maybe a few 100 doing the same journey. And at the other extreme, there are individuals doing unique journeys that nobody else is doing. So, if you go to map journeys, we know for a fact, they can't be representative.

We also know that many journeys are in fact, I would argue that most journeys down by corporates, are not drawn with any customer involvement whatsoever. They are drawn up by management and frontline staff and are often people who aren't in frontline staff. It’s sort of theoretical, the spectrum of what goes on in the world, because it's always linear and it's always simplistic. If you're going to develop your experience around those simplistic and representative journeys, you're developing a business on a lie. And I think we can do better, and we should do better. We can use general analytics. We can use other tools to augment those journey maps with data and we can recognize that they're not linear. But they can start at any point and revert, revert and go backwards.

Management very rarely meets customers. I’ve worked over the last 35 years as a consultant with Senior Management, who very rarely ever meets customers. They just don't. The exception being Toyota, where it's a thing called Genchi Genbutsu, a Japanese concept that means "go and see for yourself" or "go to the source.” The management often did go out and meet customers and dealers and talk to people face to face. So, because management doesn't meet customers, a journey map can be a very powerful synopsis of what's going on in the customers world. Of course, all managers or all corporates today claim to be customer oriented. But are they grounded in what their customers are actually doing? That’s my take on journey mapping today.

The X-Mentor: Many analysts, including another X-Mentor, Maxie Schmidt at Forrester and her Forrester Research colleague Joana de Quintanilha, define a journey as the customer's path in pursuit of a goal, capturing their perceptions before, during, and after the experience. However, you've pointed out that journey mapping often focuses on the product's pathway rather than the customer's, making it ineffective in today’s digital ecosystem. While it can help with cross-functional alignment and hypothesis creation, it can also fall short by prioritizing business goals over customer connections.

Could you elaborate on the good and bad use cases of journey mapping in this context?

Graham: Yes, it is really quite simple and fundamental if you think about it. This must include the customer’s Jobs To Be Done, their functional jobs, their emotional jobs, about how the customer wants to feel about themselves, their social jobs, about how they want to be seen by others, and also include all associated jobs that are related to what they're trying to get done. But customers don't have all the resources themselves to do those jobs. So, what do they do? Most of the time they reach out to others to get access to resources, and that's when you have a customer interaction with a company. You interact with the company to get access to those resources, to go through what's called resource integration in the service, and in doing so you bring those resources to co-create value. You're providing resources to me as a company, and I'm using whatever gets my jobs done. However, I usually don't get my job done in one interaction, it usually requires more than one interaction.

Jobs have sequence of interactions that flow and have a certain tempo, and that's your journey. And we have multiple jobs we're doing at the same time.

The total sum of all those interactions provided you with an experience you have with the organization. It might be I've just got a new credit card, or it might be a long-term use of a current account in retail banking. I might be looking to take out some sort of pension in the future. So, I'm going to run different journeys, interact in those journeys, that's all part of the bigger experience.

I think what Maxi Schmidt and Joana de Quintanilha said is exactly right. And jobs to be done now provide a foundational tool. It’s important that we focus on understanding what jobs customers are trying to get done, and not get too distracted by what they do, because often we force them to do things they don't want to do. We call that the journey, and it's a lot of journeys.

Back in the 1990s when business process engineering started with Michael Hammer and James Champy, Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution, I was involved in that work at the very beginning, and we had this big debate about should you try and fix what's broken or should it start with a blue-sky approach? And that's big discussion in BPR that guided different approaches. Journey maps start with pain points, but the pain points are usually pain that corporates are forcing upon customers, because customers are forced to do things they don't want to do, and it doesn't really work. We all have dozens and dozens of recent examples where it's getting worse as well. So, I always say start with the jobs a customer's trying to get done. Not what you force them to do. Instead, figure out what they're trying to do. Then you can work out what they actually do. You always have in the back of your mind their jobs to be done, but probably more important than jobs, is the customer’s desired outcomes, and how they measure success. It is our job in designing new services to understand what success looks like to the customer, because that leads to more success in getting the outcomes customer’s desired faster, and even better.

Jobs To Be Done Theory to Practice helps guide the process, but jobs shouldn't be the main focus. The key is understanding customers' needs, which many overlook. Without a strong service logic or foundational thinking around resource integration, the crucial interactions that lead to desired outcomes, which is the ultimate goal for the customer, are often missed.

The X-Mentor: Many journey maps seem to conflate customer needs with company goals, often focusing on business outcomes rather than customer value.

You’ve previously mentioned that two-thirds of journey maps fail to drive change, which raises the question: why?

Why are journey maps failing? What’s the cost of these failures?

Graham: It's a very good point. But on the ground, we see that many new things, whether that was ERP, BPR, CRM, etc., about 70% to 80% failure rate when it gets started and the failure is caused by over expectations. So, we have this wonderful new tool, Artificial Intelligence. AI is a good example, it's a fantastic new tool, but it cannot do everything well in reality. Yes, maybe it can do lots of things. But it can't do everything. So, we have inflated expectations.

Looking at AI, we're seeing the same inflated expectations we saw a few years ago with CRM and CX. People often expect too much, and in practice, many experienced professionals, especially from business schools, lack the right service design skills.

I would generally prefer hiring service design experts from design schools over CX professionals from business schools, as they are better trained, more knowledgeable, and have a superior toolkit for the work.

What often happens is that journey maps are too generalized and don’t reflect the real customer experience. They are developed at too high a level. For example, while working with a UK telco, I noticed their customer journey maps were too broad to be implemented in technology—they needed to be more detailed. The maps are often so high-level that the necessary details, like microservices, are missing, creating a large gap between the map and implementation. As a result, these journey maps end up being the world’s most expensive wallpaper. Or you know, a library where every piece of wallpaper costs €100,000 or whatever.

Journey maps are often too disconnected from the reality of technical implementation, making them unusable. Because they're theoretical, high-level, and unrepresentative, they overlook crucial elements like processes, data, roles, collaboration, and governance—key factors below the line of visibility in a service blueprint. Without addressing these, the maps can’t guide real-world execution. This disconnect leads to a lack of implementation, which contributes to the 80% failure rate I’ve seen in companies over the past 30 years.

Journey Analytics

The X-Mentor: In Forrester’s LinkedIn post, Don’t Let Customer Journeys Be Misunderstood, Joana de Quintanilha notes how journeys exist at different levels, with “anatomy of a journey” being broken down into “four critical elements” that include: objectives, milestones, tasks, and subtasks—moving from macro to micro journeys. In my research with The X-Mentor, I’ve found this leads to confusion, especially around the relationship (i.e., domain boundaries) between CX and UX. For example, Kim Salazar at Nielsen Norman Group has stated that "the CX and UX worlds are scaling toward each other, with journeys as the unit of change."

How can we better streamline the divide between CX and UX to create a more holistic, integrated approach?

Graham: Yes, I think it's important to include service design in the conversation because it's not the same as UX. UX tends to focus on user interaction with technology, but not everything is tech mediated. Many interactions happen with people or physical products.

For example, I worked with an accounting software company that mapped interactions throughout the customer lifecycle. They found that for the company, most value was created up to the point of sale—getting the customer to sign. But for the customer, the real value came after purchase, in the actual use of the product. Similarly, I did work with a UK bank, and they found that while their value was tied to the mortgage sale, the customer’s value came from the years of homeownership afterward.

This points to a common gap: companies focus on the path to purchase, while customers derive most value from using the product or service. Yet, journey maps often stop at the point of sale, ignoring the post-purchase experience.

Rather than trying to map everything in extreme detail, I take a modular, object-oriented approach, which aligns more with journey analytics than traditional journey mapping.

What this means is that each interaction has likely predecessors and successors. The goal is to create the most valuable interaction by integrating resources and guiding it toward the final interaction where the job gets done and the desired outcome is achieved. It's a more modular, object-oriented approach. When building journeys or using orchestration tools, you’re connecting interactions in real time, based on what comes next, instead of following a rigid, predefined journey.

What you're doing is knitting together in real time. Yarn is based on the next leg, the next allowable interaction from where you are today.

The X-Mentor: Can you clarify the key differences between traditional journey mapping and how we should approach journey analytics?

Graham: Journey analytics is not easy—it requires a lot of data, and many companies either don’t have it or rely on third parties who do, making access difficult. Digital organizations have it easier, as they can use tools to capture real customer behaviors and abstract typical or high-value journeys. However, knowing what people did isn’t enough. Even with top journey analytics tools, like one from a company I admire, InQuba, which offers great real-time journey orchestration, you still need to understand why customers took certain actions. Knowing their steps doesn’t tell you why they made them, what else they did, or what they wanted but couldn’t achieve.

I argue that you need design research to provide essential feedback to those wonderful service design people so that they can make sense of the journey analytics that you have available to you.

It's not one or the other, it's both.

Journey Orchestration

The X-Mentor: Given that many participants in a journey are outside the company, how do connected journeys capture what happens outside the digital context, in the real world? What insights can we now gain from journey analytics that we couldn’t with traditional journey mapping, such as identifying the frequency of journeys and whether they resemble paths, trails, or trenches?

Graham: Yes. And I think there is one huge difference. One enormous difference between journey mapping and journey analytics and journey orchestration, and that is a map is a static, simplified version of reality.

In my "BIG LIE" article, I gave the example of an insurance company's onboarding process with 4,000 different journeys, though only around 1,100 were commonly used. Journey orchestration, integrated with journey analytics, allows us to see where you are, where you've been, and, based on others like you, where you're likely to go next.

Journey orchestration lets us provide real-time nudges using behavioral science to keep you moving forward or offer help if you're stuck.

Journey maps are static and oversimplified, but with journey analytics and orchestration tools, we can manage customer interactions in real time to ensure both sides create value. Without these tools, a map is just a picture.

The X-Mentor: How can we shift the organizational mindset from a product-centric focus—where value is measured by what benefits the company—to a more journey-centric approach?

What are your thoughts on overcoming the friction and inertia within companies to prioritize the customer journey instead?

Graham: Yes. So, I don't need to invent any wheels here. It's been done before. There's an academic named Jay Galbraith that has written a lot of books on organization elements, and he wrote a brilliant book ~10 years ago called Designing the Customer-Centric Organization: A Guide to Strategy, Structure, and Process.

In his step-by-step process, he explains that most organizations are product-centric, which isn't necessarily bad if the product is highly differentiated. There are two main ways to achieve strategic advantage: being the lowest-cost provider or offering a highly differentiated product or service. Since most companies can't be the lowest-cost provider, differentiation is key, but only 4% of companies achieve differentiation sustainably.

Customer experience (CX) can't succeed as a cost-reduction tool; it must be a meaningful differentiator across the organization. Most companies, however, aren't very different from their competitors. To shift focus from product to customer, you start by recognizing the value of being customer-oriented. Then, gather like-minded individuals in your organization to share knowledge and create a support system. Eventually, this evolves into a cross-functional team that drives customer-oriented practices.

CX teams often lack direct control over customer touchpoints, which are usually owned by marketing, sales, and operations, so influencing others is key. As CX proves its value, a matrix organization can develop.

However, CX alone isn't enough. Studies show market orientation, which combines customer, capability, and competitor focus, is more effective.

Without differentiation, CX becomes costly without delivering competitive advantage or shareholder value. A well-rounded strategy ensures you deliver value to customers and shareholders by offering a better product or service than competitors.

The X-Mentor: Could you explain how journey orchestration works in practice and what are the key differences between journey analytics and journey orchestration?

How does journey orchestration lead to better business outcomes?

Graham: Journey orchestration, combined with analytics, allows us to track what customers actually do—when they pause, drop out, or return. It uses advanced models to map these behaviors, helping us understand the flow of journeys, which can be visualized in tools like Sankey diagrams in this credit card application example from inQuba.

For example, if we notice customers are choosing to call a support center instead of using the web, we can investigate why and improve the experience. With journey orchestration, we can act in real-time, using technology to offer nudges or support when customers get stuck. This is made possible by tools that provide personalized interactions based on data insights.

The goal is to keep customers moving along their journey, and now, with tools like generative AI, we can enhance this process—though we must be careful not to overuse AI just because it's available. The key is using the right tools intelligently to help customers achieve their goals.

Zero-Party Data

The X-Mentor: Graham, despite the vast amounts of data available, do we truly know what makes customers tick? What will it take for us to confidently model and rely on that understanding?

Graham: It's a good point. I often say companies have the 4C's of data: first-party data (customers, contracts, contacts, and consumption), second-party data (from service partners like outsourced call centers), third-party data (from CDPs, though often low-quality), and fourth-party data (external factors like weather that can impact customer moods and experiences). However, this data is mostly historical or not very reliable.

What we really need is zero-party data—data about a customer’s desires, intentions, and immediate actions. Zero-party data is held by the customer, often on their mobile devices, and is not generally available to companies. It never appears in their CDPs. The challenge is that customers are hesitant to share this, as companies have misused their data in the past with irrelevant marketing.

New tools like DataSapien, which I work with, offer access to zero-party data with customer consent, providing a better way to understand customers.

Studies show that real-time, responsive marketing is 44 times more effective than traditional methods. The future is about focusing on the usage journey, not just pre-sale or customer service. As Amazon’s former head of customer service said, “the best service is one you don’t need.” By helping customers while they use products, journey orchestration drives growth and value, improving both sales and margins.

The X-Mentor: You mentioned zero-party data, which many readers may associate with preferences, purchase intentions, or personal contacts. However, on our LinkedIn exchange regarding your “BIG LIE” article, you’ve also referenced "warm data," which focuses on understanding complex systems by examining relationships between their parts.

Could you explain how zero-party data connects with warm data and how this approach offers a more comprehensive view of the customer journey?

Graham:

This is advanced thinking, beyond where most companies are today. It’s not that they’re not smart, but they’re far from using "warm data." What's really key right now is zero-party data—the personal information about desires, intentions, and immediate actions that companies often miss. While companies can make educated guesses based on search data, it’s not the same as customers directly sharing their intentions.

Companies need better access to this rich, contextually relevant data. There are solutions, like Dataswyft, which provides third-party apps used at events, or DataSapien, that embeds data-collecting features into existing corporate apps.

For example, a supermarket could integrate an SDK into their loyalty app, allowing customers to share context, like dietary preferences. This way, businesses can offer personalized services, such as tailored meal plans, improving customer experience through permission-based, context-rich data.

This is the future of marketing!

AI and Journey Analytics

The X-Mentor: As we wrap up, I’d like to get your thoughts on a different Forrester report which shows that only 1/3 of CX professionals are using Gen AI for their VOC programs, and it’s not yet seen as a replacement for current customer feedback tools.

Looking ahead, how do you see AI being integrated with journey analytics, especially in predicting customer behavior using emotional and contextual data?

Graham: Gen AI is evolving quickly, but like all new technologies, it follows a J-shaped productivity curve. Initially, small, controlled implementations show quick returns, but as usage expands, costs rise and value decreases, with 80% of implementations not delivering results due to the complexity of setup and a lack of readiness in organizations.

Most companies are still in the experimental phase, testing use cases and learning how to train staff, especially with tasks like prompt engineering. Gen AI isn’t ready to replace everything yet, and its success relies heavily on building the right capabilities, processes, and governance structures.

As companies move through these three horizons of growth stages—starting with controlled experimentation (Horizon 3), then using Gen AI to create growth opportunities (Horizon 2), and finally integrating it into core processes for higher returns (Horizon 1)—they’ll see increasing value. But for now, organizations need to approach Gen AI cautiously, focusing on learning, testing, and building the right infrastructure to make it work effectively.

So, for example, LinkedIn, our favorite tool that has started without any announcement to take your data to train its internal Gen AI tools.

Not in Europe, though.

In Europe, the AI app effectively prevents that, so they decided not to implement it in Europe because it's going to be them into the EU, CJ and that's what they want to be. They've been there before; they want to go there again.

If I get to H2 (Horizon 2), I can start this as a growth opportunity. I can really start to make money.

The X-Mentor: This is fantastic, Graham. Thank you so much for being on The X-Mentor today. It's been fascinating and I really appreciate you taking time to speak with me today on this important topic.

Graham: Thanks for having me on, Greg. It's been a fabulous conversation. The stuff that makes life worth living.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)

Graham Hill is the founder of Janus SPV, a consultancy that drives complex business transformation initiatives for high-profile clients such as Toyota, Vodafone, PayPal, and Lufthansa. Graham has held senior consultancy roles with PwC and KPMG.

Greg Parrott is The X-Mentor and publisher of The X-Interviews and The X-Metric.