Generally speaking, journey maps are diagrams or visualizations that represent the customer’s steps or touchpoints chronologically along a horizontal axis. A quick Google search yields thousands of different formats. Yet journey maps typically have three features in common:

1. All journey maps have a clear customer or end-user perspective
2. All journey maps have a time dimension along the horizontal axis
3. All journeys consist of steps called touchpoints: Together, these steps describe how the journey unfolds over time.

However, this is where different journey approaches start to diverge. Definitions are often missing, and the level of detail and abstraction can vary significantly. A touchpoint may represent anything from a specific event, such as receiving an email, to a much broader phase, such as checking in at an airport. And then there is the “vertical wild west.” While the horizontal dimension represents time, the vertical dimension may represent almost anything: emotions, channels, opportunities, departments, systems, or a combination of these.

In particular, it is often challenging to determine who the end user actually is. Is it a persona? A real end user, and if so, who exactly? Does the journey represent a hypothetical user following a best-practice or “sunny day” scenario? An “average user”? Or simply an idealized vision of how the analyst hopes the journey will unfold? These questions become particularly important when emotions are included in the diagram. Who “owns” the experience?

CJML takes a different approach to customer journey modeling, enabling more detailed and precise journey models. By distinguishing between planned and actual journeys, CJML makes it possible to compare individual journeys with how the journey was planned or expected to unfold.

The table below highlights some important aspects of journey modeling and compares traditional journey mapping with CJML.

Traditional journey mapping	CJML
Tailored to a specific end-user group and service context.	Supports all end-user types and service domains, including customers, patients, users, citizens, and other roles
Flexible interpretation of touchpoints	Process steps are called touchpoints
Often a blurred line between theory (“to-be”) and reality (“as-is”)	Clear separation between “theory” and “reality”
Flexible granularity of touchpoints	Atomic touchpoints and journey phases for abstraction
Often unclear whose experience is represented (persona, average user, idealized user, or real individual).	Experiences are modeled as individual, subjective phenomena at each touchpoint