As-is maps what happens; to-be maps what is wanted — keep them apart

What it is

The first half of the map shows how people are bounced today; the second half suddenly contains “the system prompts them, done in one go.” Two tenses have been welded onto one sheet. An as-is journey describes only a process that has actually occurred. A to-be journey describes only a process that is wanted. Mixing them makes steps that do not exist look as if they already run, and lets “it will be better” paper over present failure. The two maps may be compared. They must not be soldered into one line.

Why it happens

Vision steps are tidier and prettier; dropping them in immediately thins the misery on the page. Readouts want “we also have a fix,” so the fix is drawn into the current state as a sense of progress. Readers can no longer tell which stretch is evidence and which is a promise; challenges to a pain are answered with “that part is already on the roadmap.” Once the present is contaminated, the baseline vanishes: after launch, no one can say which step improved, because the improvement was already on the old map. Mixed tense also wrecks acceptance—engineering treats the step as a requirement-fact, research treats it as a wish.

Studying it

Tag every step: observed, specified-but-not-happening, wish-only. Measure how mixed those three are on one map, and how often a mixed map is cited as “current state” in decision records. After launch, walk a live process back to the old map and count vision steps that were treated as an existing baseline, biasing the measured gain. Outcomes: completeness of tense tags, and the rate at which mixed maps are misread as as-is.

Where it stops holding

A transition map (as-is, with a different line type on stretches about to be replaced) can exist if the legend locks line type to tense rather than hinting with color. A service not yet live has only vision or an experimental script; there is no as-is to draw—do not pass an internal walkthrough off as current state. Steps that regulation already requires but the field still skips are neither pure as-is nor pure to-be; mark them “specified, not occurring” on their own layer.

Applying it

• Filename and header say as-is or to-be; one canvas, one tense.
• For comparison, stack or place two maps with the same stage names; do not switch tense on one timeline.
• If a step on an as-is map has no observation, move it off; do not leave it in place as “coming soon.”
• Acceptance uses as-is as baseline and new observation as result. An old to-be map is not a baseline.

Related

• Same group: Q4.04.1 A journey map spans touchpoints and shows the whole course · Q4.04.2 Emotion and pain on the map need a source · Q4.04.3 An unverified map is a team hypothesis · Q4.04.5 Too fine a grain drowns turning points; too coarse hides breaks · Q4.04.6 Maps that cross departments need shared upkeep · Q4.04.7 An unrefreshed map drifts from a changed process
• Adjacent: Q4.05 Service blueprints · Q4.06 Scenarios and storyboards
• Search terms: as-is versus to-be journey maps · current-state journey · future-state journey