Flag

We stand with Ukraine and our team members from Ukraine. Here are ways you can help

Get exclusive access to thought-provoking articles, bonus podcast content, and cutting-edge whitepapers. Become a member of the UX Magazine community today!

Home ›› Business Value and ROI ›› 6 Key Questions to Guide International UX Research ›› Using Post-Service Personas to Design Closure Experiences

Using Post-Service Personas to Design Closure Experiences

by Joe Macleod
3 min read
Share this post on
Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Save

Post-Service Personas help you understand the emotions of users after they end their relationship with a service or product, leading to better closure experiences.

Last year I wrote an article about closure experiences and the importance of offering your users a way to bring a satisfying end to their relationship with your service if and when that time comes. To make it easier to envision and design these types of experiences, I’d like to take a look at how personas can be used to improve closure experiences in our designs.

Sourcing data from market research and happy current customers does not reflect a true story of users, as it misses critical insights from recently departed customers. Post-Service Personas aim to improve that situation by considering the emotions of a user after they leave a service or product relationship. The technique is designed to highlight the reasons for a user’s departure and help designers consider the closure experience of a service.

Workshop

We conducted this technique as a workshop at UCD2013 in London and found that the workshop format provided an ideal environment, as attendees were happy to reveal some real service horror stories. It also demonstrated the shocking lack of feedback service designers receive from their lost customers: both big issues for closure experiences.

War Stories

Our first exercise sought to engender empathy in attendees by asking them to reflect on a negative end to a service they’d experienced recently. Why did it happen? Why was it difficult? What would they like to say to the service provider if they had the opportunity? We pushed them to dig deep and really get their emotions bubbling for this.

Sourcing data from market research and happy current customers does not reflect a true user story

Next, we asked them to reflect on positive endings to a service—something that might have been very special to them, like a romantic meal or vacation.

Then we asked them to reflect on these feelings and extract them into a persona. For this, we asked the attendees gather into groups and share their positive and negative experiences with one another while other members of the group captured those points.

Who Would You Tell?

Attendees were next asked to consider the actions a user might take as a result of leaving a service, starting with the communication outlets they might use. Would they tell their friends about their experience, or discuss it via social media? We wanted to push the attendees beyond the standard digital solutions, and encouraged them to bring in their own experiences from the previous exercise.

By now the groups had two clusters of captured notes: one about feelings, the other about communication. Starting with the communications of the disgruntled persona, we had them flesh out their social group, their family, their communication modes, and social networks.

Then we had them give them their personas names and map some of the feelings from the captured notes in the previous exercise. After filling in the remaining details of the persona from standard demographic data sources (where they live, income, etc.) the group had personas with origins in the post-service world.

Results

The exercise surfaced a lot of emotions in the attendees, starting with the passionate insights they had as users and the common feeling of injustice customers often experience. Thinking about how quickly users can go public with bad experiences highlighted how important it is for a service provider to have a response to these situations. As designers we are in a good position to guide clients here, but we are often blind to the situation when using the usual passive, positive personas. Post-Service Personas help bring this situation into focus.

Broadly, the workshop helped designers and clients identify with the post-service user and avoid obsessing over new features and the on-boarding of customers. Considering outcomes and how to achieve a quality long-term delivery as opposed to the short-term goals of some of the industry’s designs led them to consider closure as an achievable and comfortable conclusion, instead of something to be denied or avoided.

 

Image of cowboy riding into sunset courtesy Shutterstock.

post authorJoe Macleod

Joe Macleod
Joe Macleod has been working on the issue of Closure Experiences for 15 years. Through his work in design, technology and services, he has detected a common pattern of denial at the end of the customer lifecycle. In the last couple of years this interest has led him to establish a research project based on sharing this insight and new approach with people via conferences, articles, teaching, projects and - now - a book. His 20-year professional career has been based across the leading web, telecoms and carrier companies, where he led teams and built a variety of successful products. Most recently as Head of Design at the award-winning digital product studio Ustwo, he built it into a globally recognised team, working with the world’s favourite brands on the most pioneering of products. In 2013 he founded the IncludeDesign campaign; this brought the UK’s leading designers together to champion creative education.

Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Related Articles

AI that always agrees? Over-alignment might be the hidden danger, reinforcing your misconceptions and draining your mind. Learn why this subtle failure mode is more harmful than you think — and how we can fix it.

Article by Bernard Fitzgerald
Introducing Over-Alignment
  • The article explores over-alignment — a failure mode where AI overly validates users’ assumptions, reinforcing false beliefs.
  • It shows how this feedback loop can cause cognitive fatigue, emotional strain, and professional harm.
  • The piece calls for AI systems to balance empathy with critical feedback to prevent these risks.
Share:Introducing Over-Alignment
4 min read

Why does AI call you brilliant — then refuse to tell you why? This article unpacks the paradox of empty praise and the silence that follows when validation really matters.

Article by Bernard Fitzgerald
The AI Praise Paradox
  • The article explores how AI often gives empty compliments instead of real support, and how design choices like that can make people trust it less.
  • It looks at the strange way AI praises fancy-sounding language but ignores real logic, which can be harmful, especially in sensitive areas like mental health.
  • The piece argues that AI needs to be more genuinely helpful and aligned with users to truly empower them.
Share:The AI Praise Paradox
4 min read

Mashed potatoes as a lifestyle brand? When AI starts generating user personas for absurd products — and we start taking them seriously — it’s time to ask if we’ve all lost the plot. This sharp, irreverent critique exposes the real risks of using LLMs as synthetic users in UX research.

Article by Saul Wyner
Have SpudGun, Will Travel: How AI’s Agreeableness Risks Undermining UX Thinking
  • The article explores the growing use of AI-generated personas in UX research and why it’s often a shortcut with serious flaws.
  • It introduces critiques that LLMs are trained to mimic structure, not judgment. When researchers use AI as a stand-in for real users, they risk mistaking coherence for credibility and fantasy for data.
  • The piece argues that AI tools in UX should be assistants, not oracles. Trusting “synthetic users” or AI-conjured feedback risks replacing real insights with confident nonsense.
Share:Have SpudGun, Will Travel: How AI’s Agreeableness Risks Undermining UX Thinking
22 min read

Join the UX Magazine community!

Stay informed with exclusive content on the intersection of UX, AI agents, and agentic automation—essential reading for future-focused professionals.

Hello!

You're officially a member of the UX Magazine Community.
We're excited to have you with us!

Thank you!

To begin viewing member content, please verify your email.

Tell us about you. Enroll in the course.

    This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Check our privacy policy and