How to Create a User Journey Map for a Proposed Space

A proposed space can look convincing in plan, section and render while still being difficult to use. A user journey map exposes the gap between visual appeal and lived experience. It follows people through arrival, orientation, movement, activity, pause and departure, showing what they need at each stage and where the design may create friction.

For architecture students presenting a graduation project, this method turns usability into something a jury can understand quickly. It gives your design a human sequence: who arrives, what they notice, how they make decisions, which spaces support them, and how the building responds when conditions change. The same evidence can strengthen a competition board, physical model, walkthrough or digital presentation.

Define The User And Their Purpose

Begin with a specific person rather than an abstract “user”. A library might serve a secondary student, an older resident, a librarian, a parent with a pram and a person who is unfamiliar with the building. Each person brings a different level of confidence, mobility, time pressure and expectation. Select two or three priority users whose experiences reveal the central idea of the project.

Then define the purpose of the visit. Someone entering a community health centre may be seeking an appointment room, collecting medication, asking for directions or supporting a family member. These tasks create different routes and emotional states. A clear journey map should show the relationship between purpose and space, rather than tracing movement as a decorative line over a floor plan.

Write a short user profile for every journey. Include age range, relevant physical or sensory needs, familiarity with the place, time available and the desired outcome. Avoid reducing people to stereotypes. A first-time visitor may be an experienced traveller, while a regular visitor may have a temporary injury. These small distinctions lead to more credible design decisions.

Set The Stages Of The Visit

A useful map usually follows a sequence such as anticipate, arrive, enter, orient, move, participate, pause and leave. The stages do not need to be identical for every project. A public gallery may begin with online information and ticketing, while a student housing proposal may begin at the street, bike store or shared laundry.

For each stage, record four things: the user’s action, the spatial touchpoint, the likely feeling and the design response. For example, “find the main entrance” may connect to a visible canopy, a change in paving and a line of sight to reception. “Wait for an appointment” may require acoustic control, daylight, seating variety and a clear estimate of waiting time.

Use verbs that describe behaviour: notice, compare, queue, ask, rest, cross, collect, gather and retreat. These are more useful than labels such as “foyer” or “circulation zone”. A journey map should reveal what people do in a place, including the informal actions that plans often miss.

In Australia, arrival conditions can change sharply across the year. A person approaching a civic building in Brisbane may be moving quickly through heavy summer rain, while someone in Melbourne may be negotiating a tram stop, a crowded footpath and a cold southerly wind. Mapping the threshold should account for shelter, drainage, slip resistance, shade and the practical location of umbrellas, bikes and mobility aids.

Gather Evidence Before Drawing

The strongest user journey maps are based on observation, precedent research and conversations, not assumptions alone. Visit a comparable building and record where people hesitate, form queues, gather in groups or choose an unofficial shortcut. Photograph relationships between signs, doors, furniture and sightlines, subject to permission. A simple timing exercise can show whether the proposed route is plausible.

Ask users to describe a recent experience in a similar space. Questions about confusion, comfort and control often produce better insights than asking whether someone “likes” a design. A person may appreciate a dramatic stair but avoid it when carrying a bag. A brightly lit lobby may look welcoming yet feel exposed to a person waiting for a private consultation.

Review standards and operational requirements alongside lived experience. In Australia, access provisions under the National Construction Code and the principles reflected in AS 1428 should shape the route from the beginning, rather than being applied as a late compliance layer. Check door clearances, gradients, tactile indicators, accessible toilets, resting points and visual contrast as connected parts of the experience.

Research should include cultural context. If a project sits on or near Country with strong cultural significance, consult appropriate sources and people rather than treating local identity as a graphic motif. A meaningful journey may include recognition of Country, a respectful approach to gathering and a relationship to landscape that affects how visitors enter, wait and participate.

Translate Movement Into Spatial Decisions

Once the stages are clear, place the journey on a plan, section or axonometric drawing. Use a consistent line for the route and small annotations for decisions, feelings and potential obstacles. Mark changes in level, compression and release, noise, temperature, views, queues and points where a person must choose a direction.

The map should show alternative routes as well as the ideal route. A visitor may arrive after an event has finished, when a door is locked or a room is occupied. A staff member may need to move equipment without crossing a public queue. A wheelchair user may encounter a technically compliant route that is much longer, less visible or separated from everyone else. These are usability issues with spatial and social consequences.

Think about information as part of the architecture. A person needs to know where to go, whether they are allowed to enter and what happens next. Information can come from a receptionist, a sign, a material change, a framed view, a light source or the position of other people. If a map requires too many arrows and explanatory notes, the spatial hierarchy may need work.

Consider sensory movement as well as physical movement. Acoustic echoes can make a reception desk difficult to understand. Glare can erase a digital sign. Strong odours from a kitchen can be pleasant in one setting and distressing in another. A good journey map identifies these conditions at the point where they affect behaviour, then links them to ceiling height, finishes, ventilation, planting, lighting or operational policy.

Identify Friction And Moments Of Support

A map becomes valuable when it makes problems visible. Look for moments of uncertainty, exposure, waiting, crowding, fatigue and conflict between different users. Give each issue a clear location and consequence. “The foyer feels confusing” is vague; “a first-time visitor cannot see reception from the entry and joins a queue for event registration” gives you something to redesign.

Balance friction with moments of support. A low window may offer a child a clear view of the courtyard. A seat halfway along a long ramp can provide rest without isolating the user. A threshold may offer a shaded pause before someone enters a busy hall. These moments demonstrate that usability is about dignity, choice and confidence, not merely avoiding hazards.

Evidence To Record On Site

Arrival routes, crossings, kerbs, public transport stops and bicycle access
Points where people pause, change direction, ask for help or create informal queues
Light, glare, heat, wind, rain, noise, smell and surface changes
Furniture, signs, doors and thresholds that assist or obstruct different bodies

Questions To Ask About The Proposal

Can a first-time visitor understand the next step without staff assistance?
Is there an equivalent route for people with different mobility, sensory or communication needs?
What happens when the space is busy, closed, wet, hot, dark or being serviced?
Does the design offer meaningful choices about speed, privacy, social contact and rest?

Pay attention to local patterns of use. In regional towns, visitors may arrive by car and need a legible connection from a large parking area. In inner Sydney or Melbourne, the journey may begin at a crowded footpath and continue through a narrow frontage. In a Perth landscape, shade and heat on exposed paths can determine whether an outdoor space is genuinely usable. The map should reflect these realities rather than an idealised empty site.

Show The Journey In Your Presentation

A jury should be able to understand the journey without listening to a long explanation. Pair the map with a plan showing the route, a section showing changes in height and atmosphere, and two or three perspective views at significant moments. Use the same colour or symbol for each user across every drawing. A small legend can explain actions, needs, barriers and design responses.

Select moments that prove the proposal works. A view of the entrance can demonstrate recognition and shelter. A section through a ramp, stair and lift can show choice and inclusion. A room sequence can explain how a noisy public area transitions to a quieter space. Avoid filling the board with generic atmospheric images that do not communicate decisions.

A digital walkthrough can make timing, scale and visibility easier to understand, particularly when the proposal depends on a sequence of thresholds. The discussion of virtual reality in design presentation is useful when deciding whether immersion adds evidence or simply spectacle. A headset should help a viewer evaluate wayfinding, enclosure and eye level, not distract from unresolved planning.

For an exhibition or juried review, explain the map as a short story. State who the user is, where the journey begins, what problem the design addresses and which spatial choices support the outcome. Information about event participation and exhibition details can help students understand how a project may need to communicate in a public setting, where visitors encounter work quickly and from different levels of architectural knowledge.

Test The Map With Real People

Testing should happen before the final drawings are fixed. Give a participant a simple task, such as finding a workshop, locating an accessible toilet or reaching a quiet outdoor area. Do not guide them immediately. Record where they look, what they misunderstand, how long they take and which cues they trust. The point is to test the environment, not the participant’s intelligence.

A paper plan can support an early workshop. Cut out furniture, users and temporary activities, then ask people to arrange them at different times of day. A role-play can expose conflicts between deliveries, school groups, staff and visitors. For a more developed project, a taped floor layout or low-cost cardboard model can test turning circles, queue depth, sightlines and furniture scale.

Invite people with different experiences to respond. An architecture student may read a plan easily but overlook the anxiety of a first-time visitor. A parent may identify pram storage and toilet access immediately. An older participant may reveal that a long, visually monotonous corridor makes distance difficult to judge. Record comments without treating one person as representative of everyone.

Simple Testing Outputs

A route diagram with observed pauses, wrong turns and assistance points
A short timing record for arrival, orientation, access and departure
Annotated photographs or sketches showing glare, sound, shade and surface conditions
A ranked list separating critical barriers from preferences and optional refinements

Useful Prototype Methods

Full-scale tape lines for entries, seating, counters and circulation widths
Cardboard walls or movable screens to test enclosure and visibility
A guided digital walkthrough with the camera held at different eye levels
Scenario cards for rain, peak crowds, deliveries, low vision or reduced mobility

After each test, revise the journey rather than defending the original idea. If several people miss the entrance, strengthen the threshold sequence. If a route works only when a staff member gives instructions, improve spatial legibility. If a beautiful stair is rarely chosen, find out whether the issue is effort, safety, exposure or lack of a practical destination.

Refine The Proposal And Its Story

A journey map is most effective when it changes the project. Use a simple priority system: essential for access and safety, important for clarity and comfort, and desirable for atmosphere or delight. This helps you make decisions when the brief, budget or site imposes limits. A clear entrance, continuous accessible route and understandable toilet location should outrank a decorative feature that has little effect on use.

Connect each design response to an observed need. “Add a bench” is weak unless the map shows where people become tired or need to wait. “Move reception” becomes persuasive when the original position creates a blind turn, a queue through the entry and repeated requests for directions. This cause-and-effect chain allows jurors to see design thinking rather than a collection of isolated gestures.

In commercial and public projects, usability also affects the market around architecture. Australian clients often weigh operational efficiency, maintenance, accessibility, climate response and community value alongside visual identity. A proposal that demonstrates shorter service routes, flexible rooms, comfortable waiting and reduced confusion can speak to owners and operators as well as design jurors.

Use precedent carefully. A curated exhibition can show how other designers frame a spatial idea, but your map should remain grounded in your site, users and brief. The discussion of curated architectural works can prompt useful comparisons about selection and presentation, while your own evidence explains why a particular sequence belongs in your project.

Make The Practical Takeaway Visible

Finish the map with a clear statement of performance. Identify the user, the key journey, the main obstacle and the spatial move that resolves it. Then show the evidence in a drawing that can be read quickly: a route on plan, a section through the critical threshold, a short sequence of views and concise annotations. Keep the graphic language consistent so the jury can follow the experience without decoding every page.

Review the proposal in ordinary conditions as well as the ideal scenario. Test the route when it is raining, crowded, hot, noisy, unfamiliar and partly closed. Check whether a person can pause without blocking others, ask for help without embarrassment and choose a route that suits their body and purpose. A space becomes convincing when its atmosphere and operation support the same story.

The practical takeaway is simple: map a real person through a real sequence, test the moments where decisions or discomfort occur, and revise the architecture until each stage has a clear spatial response.