Touchpoint Value Mapping is a technique to improve organizational performance and service delivery through understanding user experiences. It involves mapping touchpoints of interaction and identifying gaps between actual experiences, service standards, and values. These gaps are analyzed to improve outcomes for both organizations and users. Touchpoint maps can be used for customers, patients, employees and more to enhance services across systems, roles, competencies and well-being. The approach draws from models of service quality, customer journeys, and touchpoint mapping to provide a holistic view of experiences and identify interrelated issues.

1. Touchpoint Value Mapping
Proventive Solutions
Touchpoint Value Mapping: User focused service and performance improvement.
This is about using user experiences at points of interaction –touchpoints- to understand how to achieve better
performance outcomes from:
 Services to customers, patients, community groups;
 Roles (either job or team/group) are carried out;
 Employee competence within a role that needs improving;
 Employee well-being: Health & safety, and satisfaction.
While these are widely different areas, we can improve the way organisations perform and provide support and
services to users through the use of Touchpoint Value Mapping.
The basis of Touchpoint Value Mapping is drawn from a number of writers [1] whose focus is primarily on improving
customer service. However, Touchpoint Value Mapping can be significantly widened by thinking of the different
kinds of services provided, both within and external to an organisation, and considering the wide range of users
there are who would like to see their experiences understood to develop and improve the value of performance
outcomes for both organisations and recipients. For example, for:
 A buying customer
 A user of a service;
 A patient;
 A community group;
 An interest group;
 Internal customers serviced by a role or team/group (e.g. next role/group in a process or service delivery
system);
 Users of corporate support areas. For example employees experience of HR practices and employment
conditions of an organisation (e.g. complaint management practices, selection and appointment practices,
employee entitlements; payroll issues, training and development provided);
 Other role holders affected by the role competence of an employee;
 Employees affected by the work environment (e.g. Health and Safety factors, including stress related issues).
Diagram 1 provides a generic Touchpoint Mapping model, where a range of different User Services are identified (in
grey). User experiences (in green, yellow, or red) at touch points (in grey) can generate “service gaps” (in blue).
From this service standards (in brown) and service values (in purple) can be considered as ways to improve user
experiences and the value of service and performance.
David Alman
June 2012
Page 1

2. Touchpoint Value Mapping
Actual
Service
delivered
(System)
Touchpoints
for respective
services
Proventive Solutions
Sample Range of User Service Deliveries - Examples
Service Delivery System
Performance
Service
Touch
point
Service
Touch
point
Role (job/group)
Performance
Service
Touch
point
Service
Touch
point
Employee Role
Competences
Service
Touch
point
Employee well-being
Support (e.g. safety risks)
Service
Touch
point
Service
Touch
point
Experience Gap
(Impact rating)
Positive
Touchpoint
Experience
Negative
Touchpoint
Experience
Actual user
experience
Service
Standard Gap
(Effectiveness –
missing, fix,
add, eliminate)
Service Value
Gap
(Owner
commitment)
Customer
thoughts &
feelings
Customer
thoughts &
feelings
Current
Current
Proposed
Proposed
Current
Proposed
Current
Proposed
Diagram 1 Generic Touchpoint Vale Map
David Alman
June 2012
Page 2

3. Touchpoint Value Mapping
Proventive Solutions
Touchpoint Value Maps can be drawn in different ways, for example as a moment by moment string of touchpoints
in a journey as shown in diagram 1, or as geographic drawing or sketch of an area within which that moment by
moment Touchpoint journey occurs.
Identified user value gaps at the interaction – Touchpoint- level involve, as illustrated in Diagram 1, considering,
identifying, and addressing three service support levels within an organisation:
 The Actual Experience Gap (in blue) between actual and preferred experience gap can be valued and the
impact rated in different ways [2]. For example:
o
In Diagram 1 user experience is colour coded. This can be simply translated into +1, 0. -1 for
green, yellow, and red respectively, and the total experience the Total Perceived Value totalled.
o
This can be made more detailed through a wider variance range, and also though the use of
weighted measures.
 Also as shown under the Actual Experience Gap (in blue) in Diagram 1 are recorded feelings and thoughts
(e.g. frustration) in terms of a user’s perception of touchpoint experiences. This can be reflected in a
reasonable or fair treatment model where a:
 Decision;
 Process (or practice);
 Interpersonal contact; and/ or
 Values, such as those perceived in expressed or implied in attitudes, assumptions, beliefs etc.
Can be tangible and intangible areas impacting on user’s perception of the value of a service. This can
be shown as a Fair Treatment model as in Diagram 2.
Decisions
Values
Process
Interpersonal
Diagram 2 Fair Treatment Model
 Service Standards Gap: Identify gaps between customer Preferred Experience and Service Standards set.
Where questions about their effectiveness can be considered. For example, are there any missing; need to be
reset; added; or eliminated.
David Alman
June 2012
Page 3

4. Touchpoint Value Mapping
Proventive Solutions
 Service Value Gap: Recognise gaps between current Service Values (e.g. management and frontline
attitudes that influence and support the way Service Standards are applied.
Touchpoint Value Mapping can be applied to a range of circumstances to improve service and performance for users
that are either within or external to and organisation. It is a systems approach, seeking out interrelated and
systemic causes that need to be considered together for a successful improvement at role, process, and
organisational level, and added value to user experience.
References
References in the development of this Touchpoint Value Mapping document are drawn from two themes.
The first relates to a Value Mapping Journey that a number of writers on contributors have referenced in
different ways:
The Gaps Model of service quality (Zeithaml, Parasuraman & Berry 1990) used in the ServQual. Reference:
http://www.uob-community.ballarat.edu.au/.../BM404/BM404_lecture2.ppt
http://www.freequality.org/documents/training/GapAnalysis%5B2%5D.ppt
Then, the Customer Journey Maps (CJMs), as referenced in:
http://www.cxacademy.org/customer-journeys-an-introduction.html
http://www.mycustomer.com/topic/customer-experience/customer-journey-mapping-and-process-designdo-you-know-difference/136609
Then, Touchpoint Mapping as in references such as:
http://www.baesystemsdetica.com/uploads/resources/9c0d133204f07af12f5fd69fd70f1ddb1.pdf
http://www.slideshare.net/TrainiacSA/overview-of-customer-touchpoint-mapping
http://www.touchpointdashboard.com/2011/08/what-is-a-customer-touchpoint-or-journey-map/
The second relates to Value Network Analysis and the measurement of Value Contribution. Reference:
http://www.valuenetworksandcollaboration.com/analysis/perceivedvalue.html
David Alman
June 2012
Page 4