Keywords

1 Introduction

Thinking and offering services in the terms of systems generate a new competitive advantage, this is how Kalbach defines the yardstick for future services [1]. The mobility sector is also facing up to this challenge. Mobility providers cooperate with each other to provide customers a seamless intermodal travel chain. In contrast to traditional services, users can individually determine their journey across multiple means of transport and thus the user experience arises over the entire travel, from travel planning to arrival at the destination. In order to systematically design this holistic experience, the concept of the mobility experience was introduced. The mobility experience covers all the passenger’s perceptions and responses resulting from any direct or indirect contact and anticipated contact with the service providers along the journey [2].

For designing new mobility services, methods and tools are required that can describe and visualise the holistic nature of the mobility experience in order to understand the design space, make design decisions and assess their impact in advance. For example, it is crucial to design each touchpoint, without losing sight of the user’s overall experience [3]. Yet despite the recognition of the importance, there are hardly any scientific discussions on this subject [3], especially in mobility sector. By contrast, in design practice the method experience mapping is partly used to face these challenges. Building on findings from practical work, the present research is investigating whether the mobility experience of users can be conceptually expressed in the form of an experience map. In doing so, the investigation is guided by the research question: How can the mobility experience be described and visualized in a generic way in order to build a framework for a mobility experience map?

Answering the issue, this article discusses at the beginning different approaches for experience mapping in the theoretical basics. Afterwards, the study identifies the essential elements and interrelations that constitute the mobility experience and thus builds the framework for the experience visualisation in the form of an experience map. Finally, the implications for the analysis of the holistic mobility experience and the specific limitations of the presented framework will be discussed.

2 Background on Experience Mapping

The literature in service science and user-centered design historically has not considered experience maps as a separate research topic. However, efforts have already been made with other methods to illustrate the experience of users. All methods visualise the experience to support the designers in their design activities: Understanding experience, exploring the experience of new design ideas and communicating users’ experience. The methods provide different insights, depending on the described factors influencing the user’s experience and the described responses of a user. The influencing factors show which elements affect the experience during a user journey. The latter shows physical and psychological responses of users to the provided services. In order to distinguish the experience map from the other methods, different approaches are discussed with each other.

The service blueprint is an applied process diagram that subdivides the service delivery process from the customer’s perspective [e.g. 4]. The process covers the physical activities of a customer that lead to interactions with the service provider. The mental model diagram, on the other hand, provides deeper insights into a user’s cognitive perspective. Young transferred the concept of mental models into simplified affinity diagrams of behaviours [cf. 5]. The goal is to contrast the behaviour of the users with the potential solutions of an organization. In contrast, the empathy map uses a more comprehensive approach to understand the user’s behaviour. Therefore the empathy map integrates the elements what users think and feel, hear, see, say and do, as well as the pain and gain of the users [e.g. 6]. The method tries to uncover why users are functioning the way they are and investigates cognitive, affective, sensorial, and physical responses of a user. Thereby the focus is on the description of the responses, the influencing factors as well as the interactions with a service providers are not considered. This combination of the user responses and the influencing factors depicts the customer journey map. The customer journey involves all activities and events related to the delivery of a service from the customer’s perspective [7]. But the displayed spectrum of the experience varies in the different customer journey maps. In summary, the goal of the customer journey map is to illustrate how customers behave across a journey, what they are feeling, and what their motivation and attitude is across that journey [7].

Building on these insights, recent definitions point out that “experience maps focus on a general human activity within a given domain” [1]. In contrast to the customer journey map, the experience map separates a user’s experience from the concrete solutions of a provider [1]. In doing so, it illustrates the user’s journey, in which a user interacts with a variety of different touchpoints and providers. Adding to the above, the experience map represents an archetypal user journey through a certain domain and considers all activities and events that are relevant to the user’s experience. In order to give a comprehensive picture of the holistic experience, the experience map should contain the cognitive, affective, and physical responses of a user.

3 Research Design

In this research, the method experience map is investigated and adapted to the field of mobility. The aim is to develop a framework for the mobility experience map that enables the analysis and communication of holistic mobility experience. To achieve this goal, the research procedure is divided into four phases and is oriented on the design science research framework [8] (Table 1). In the phase I, a basic construct for the mobility experience map is determined. The subject of this investigation is the disclosure of a uniform structure for experience maps. In detail, it is examined which elements are used to describe the experience, by the authors of experience maps. For this purpose, 40 practical experience maps from the sector of entertainment, finance, healthcare, mobility, and retail are investigated. All used elements from the 40 practical examples are documented and then evaluated according to their frequency of use. Building on these results, the basic elements of a mobility experience map can be determined.

The phase II covers the evaluation of the developed construct. Ten experts are provided with the construct and use it to develop an experience map for mobility. In the following interviews, the experts assess the construct in terms of completeness, simplicity, elegance, understandability, and ease of use [cf. 8]. The results are then evaluated and combined in the model for a mobility experience map (Phase III).

Finally, the application and evaluation of the mobility experience map follow in two case studies (Phase IV). The case studies are carried out as part of two research projects by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research and Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure in Germany. Depending on the focus of the projects, a map for electric mobility and a map for public transport are developed. To validate the developed framework, the two experience maps are examined using the member checking method. Experts interviewed in Phase II assess the two mobility experience maps and the underlying model, giving their approval or rejection of the results. The mobility experience maps are evaluated in terms of their fidelity with real world phenomena, completeness, and level of detail [cf. 8].

Table 1. Research procedure
Full size table

4 Results

As explained in the beginning, the main goal of this research is to provide a framework for an experience map that allows the designers to accurately describe and visualize the mobility experience of a user. The underlying structure of the framework consists of basic elements that describe the content of a mobility experience map. Furthermore, the interrelations within the mobility experience map are investigated in order to reveal general perspectives that can support the designers to understand the holistic experience and to carry out a systematic analysis and design.

4.1 Basic Elements of Mobility Experience Maps

Looking for an appropriate basic structure for the mobility experience map, the initial question arises: Which elements are necessary in an experience map in order to adequately represent the mobility experience? The search for the basic structure of the mobility experience map is accompanied by two contradictory objectives. The experience map intends to both provide the designers with a comprehensive understanding of the mobility experience, and at the same time to ensure that the experience map is easy to use. Therefore, a trade-off must be sought between the completeness and simplicity of a mobility experience map.

Table 2. Comparison of experience maps from practice
Full size table

Due to the lack of scientific discussions and the limited practical use of experience maps in the field of mobility, a step-by-step approach is conducted to answer this question. The best practice analysis conducted in Phase I examines 40 experience map examples covering the sectors of entertainment, finance, healthcare, mobility, and retail. As the result, the synthesis reveals that seven elements are used most often in an experience map: Descriptive user model, provider opportunities, touchpoints, usage process, user activities, user emotions, and user thinking (Table 2).

However, the comparison of the results of the best practice analysis (Phase I) with the results of the expert study (Phase II) shows that the elements of an experience map used in practice must be adapted to meet the characteristics of the mobility sector. The experts express the need to extend the mobility experience map by the element context. According to experts, context influences the effectiveness and efficiency of an executed user activity. In addition, the perception of a mobility service is also influenced by the environment (so-called service scape) in which the usage process takes place. The element context is particularly relevant for the area of public mobility services. For example, a long queue at the ticket machine or insufficiently air-conditioned vehicles can have a negative impact on the experience of a passenger. But also in the case of individual transport, the context, such as traffic density or road conditions, influences a user’s mobility experience.

According to the experts, there is a need for further changes with regard to the element provider opportunities. The opportunities illustrate how providers can influence and improve the user experience. The experts are of the opinion that provider opportunities should not be part of a mobility experience map. This element does not provide any further information about the users and their behaviour. The experts see the provider opportunities as a further analysis that can be carried out on the basis of the mobility experience map. The results of the analysis have a special relevance in deciding and prioritizing future measures.

In summary, the studies carried out (Phase I + II) reveal that the mobility experience can best be described using seven basic elements (Fig. 1) (Table 3).

Fig. 1.
figure 1

Basic elements of a mobility experience map

Full size image
Table 3. Description of the basic elements of a mobility experience map
Full size table

4.2 Three Perspectives for Understanding Mobility Experience Maps

The perspectives serve as an instrument for the analysis of a mobility experience map. The goal is to illustrate the interrelations within the experience map for designers in order to increase their understanding of the mobility experience. These perspectives are the result of the investigations in the phases II + IV. In the discussions with the experts, the interrelations within a mobility experience map could be extracted and subsequently generalized in the terms of the three perspectives (Fig. 2). The perspectives sequence and interaction-response reveal findings on the internal structure of the experience map. Whereas the perspective experience cycle describes how the users perceive a service and shows how the mobility experience occurs and alters.

Sequence Perspective (Chronological Order – Workload – Rhythm).

Mobility services are dynamic processes that take place over a certain period of time [cf. 10] and therefore the chronological order is crucial for the understanding of mobility experience. This chronological order arranges the elements of the mobility experience in terms of content (horizontal axis) and indicates which sequence of the usage process appears plausible to the user. In addition to that, the chronological order also makes it possible to divide the usage process into individual phases. In this way, the single phases, such as planning a journey, can be considered separately, which allows a detailed analysis of the mobility experience.

Fig. 2.
figure 2

Three perspectives for understanding mobility experience maps

Full size image

This sequence of the individual phases is usually depicted in the experience map as a linear process. Contrary to this linear and at the same time seemingly ideal-typical process, experts estimate that in reality the use of a mobility service is often not linear. The planning of a journey is usually cited as an example. Passengers of public transport services perform identical activities several times in order to compare different mobility providers and their travel connections. Due to the non-linear usage process, the workload for the users increases. This workload is reflected in a large number of cognitive and physical activities for the users and possibly through increased resource input. Both can influence the mobility experience.

Analog to the workload in the usage process, the rhythm of a mobility service also becomes visible when the touchpoints in a mobility experience map are related to each other. The rhythm shows the user involvement per period in usage process. A decisive factor for mobility experience is thereby the intensity of interaction, which can be described by the frequency and the extent of the interactions between users and mobility providers. According to the experts, the timing of the interaction also plays an important role. During the usage process, so-called key moments arise, in which the user perceives the mobility service particularly positively or negatively. The experts have cited, for example, changing trains or disruptions in the public transport as critical moments.

Interaction-Response Perspective.

In the interviews with the experts, it was often discussed how an interaction at a touchpoint affects the mobility experience of a user. To reveal these effects, the mobility experience map can be divided vertically into two areas: Interaction area and response area. This contrast compares the relevant components for an interaction (upper part of the experience map) with the user’s responses to an interaction (lower part). From the human-machine-interaction perspective, an interaction is characterized by the interplay of the three factors: Human – task – technique [17]. Transferred to the mobility experience map, an interaction can be described by the three basic elements: Descriptive user model – Goal of usage phase – Touchpoint. For the service providers, the goal is to design an optimal interplay of the three factors within every single interaction. So that, for example, even occasional users can easily find a suitable alternative travel connection with their mobile passenger information application in the event of a disruption in public transport.

In the lower part of an experience map, there arises the question of how users perceive the interplay between the three factors and how they response to it. If, for example, occasional users do not find current information about the disruption, they wonder (cognitive response) whether they are looking in the wrong place in the application. As a result, they quit the interaction (physical response) frustrated without having found the information (emotional response). The example shows that the analysis of the user’s cognitive, emotional, and physical responses provides an understanding in which way the interaction has an impact on the mobility experience. In a mobility experience map, these responses are covered by the basic elements user emotions, user thinking, and the resulting user activities.

Experience Cycle Perspective.

An experience map tends to focus on the depiction of the usage phase of an user journey. However, the usage phase is only one part of the user’s experience perception and processing. Rather, the user’s experience perception and processing can be interpreted as a cycle. In order to understand this experience cycle, it is necessary to consider not only the actual use of a mobility service, but also the assumptions and expectations prior to use as well as the reflection after the actual use [cf. 18]. In relation to the mobility experience map, it is therefore advisable to divide the process into the phases: Pre-usage – Actual usage – Post-usage.

The experience cycle closes when analysing how the mobility experience after the usage affects a user and may influence his or her expectations, beliefs, and future behaviour. In the context of the experience map, this means that the perceived and processed experience may lead to the reshaping of the user description created at the beginning. As a result, the user description in the mobility experience map is both the starting point and the end point of the experience cycle.

5 Discussion - Contributions to Designing for Mobility Experience

The mobility experience map enables the user-centered visualization of complex intermodal mobility services. Thus the visualization represents the mobility experience that is formed through interactions with multiple services from multiple organizations that go beyond the provider’s offerings [cf. 19]. In doing so, the method helps to consider service concepts and touchpoints in the holistic context of the mobility experience and contribute a crucial support for design activities, such as understanding existing experience, exploring service ideas and communicating service concepts.

The mobility experience map contributes to a change in the way of thinking and thus promotes holistic design decisions. From now on, a design solution will not be evaluated on the basis of its performance at a single touchpoint, but on the basis of its contribution to the holistic mobility experience along the entire intermodal journey. In addition, the experience map can also serve as a source of inspiration and provide valuable insights for the identification of new service ideas and further developments. The experience map reveals during which phase of a journey barriers and problems arise for the user. At the same time, it also becomes apparent to what extent users are supported by the existing touchpoints, or whether these user barriers have not been addressed at all so far. This systematic decomposition based on the travel chain also helps to determine and prioritize user needs during requirements engineering for new services. Beyond the understanding and exploring of the mobility experience, the method also contributes to the communication. The method creates a common ground and understanding for the user’s perspective in complex mobility systems in terms of a visual language. The visualization provides a rapid introduction to complex mobility systems so that different members of multidisciplinary teams can use the experience map to comprehend and communicate design issues in every stage of the development process.

In additional to the contributions to the design, the expert study also reveals the limitations of the framework. According to the experts, adapting the mobility experience map to the intended use can be beneficial. For example, when communicating with external stakeholders, information must be focused on the essentials. For this purpose, a kind of experience indicator could be introduced in the framework. The objective of these indicators is to describe the experience in a compressed form with the help of a certain scale.

When creating a mobility experience map, experts also see a challenge in how to show the insights in the visual layout. This question was not explicitly addressed in this study. In practice, the layouts vary widely. For the visualization of the user emotions, for example, the authors use bar charts, plane diagrams, and curve representations or descriptions of the experience through phrases. Further investigations are required to identify visual presentations that can highlight the essential features of the mobility experience and their interrelationships and de-emphasize less important details.

6 Conclusion

Creating a holistic mobility experience has been gaining increasing attention from mobility providers. However, there has been a dearth of adequate methods for analysing and communicating the holistic mobility experience.

Therefore, the article investigates the method of the experience map in order to use it in the field of mobility. In the best practice analysis conducted at the beginning, the article examines currently used experience maps. Based on these findings, the two-stage expert study reveals the basic elements of the mobility experience map. The expert study also shows which perspectives are suitable for analysing an experience map in order to increase the understanding of the holistic mobility experience. As the result of this research, the seven basic elements together with the three perspectives build a framework for mobility experience maps. Subsequently, the article discusses the implications for the analysis of the holistic experience and the limitations of the presented framework, highlighting those that are especially in need of further research.