This post is the first in a two-part series exploring the role of behavior mapping in the pharma industry. Across the series, we unpack behavior mapping, explain how it differs from patient experience mapping, and discuss why pharma teams should pay close attention to this approach. We’ll also look at the common challenges behavior mapping can solve and outline the key steps for applying this approach effectively. In part two, we will break down the critical steps in the process.
Over the years, working alongside pharma teams, I’ve noticed a recurring point of confusion: behavior mapping and patient experience mapping (also sometimes called patient journey mapping) often get lumped together. They sound similar, but they serve very different purposes.
This two-part series is about unpacking that difference and making the case for why behavior mapping deserves a much closer look. In this first post, I’ll explain what behavior mapping really is, why it matters, and how it can help pharma teams solve some familiar challenges. In part two, I’ll break down the process itself.
Most pharma teams are pretty familiar with patient experience mapping. It’s a helpful tool, but it often gives a broad, sometimes idealized view of a patient’s journey: what we imagine they might do, how we think they might feel, or how we hope they’ll interact with a medication or service.
Behavior mapping, on the other hand, is different. It’s sharper, more grounded, and more evidence-based. It’s all about uncovering what people actually do, why they do it, and the real-world context in which those behaviors happen.
Where patient experience mapping can drift toward assumptions or hypotheticals and generalizations, behavior mapping keeps us anchored in reality, cutting through the noise to expose the friction points and behavioral barriers that genuinely get in the way.
One of the most common things we hear when talking to pharma teams is: “We’ve already done journey mapping.” But in many cases, what they’ve actually done is document app screens, communication flows, or emotional journeys, not a detailed view of how patients behave in the real world.
These traditional approaches tend to fall short because they’re often detached from lived reality. For example, it’s easy to imagine a focus group where patients say they’d be “interested in a digital health solution.” But when you ask a more grounded question like “When was the last time you tracked a symptom?” or “How do you actually track it today?”, the picture gets clearer and much more useful.
Behavior mapping is about triangulating what people do, why they do it, and the context around it. It draws from interviews, observation, behavioral science principles, and a healthy scepticism for surface-level insights.
Pharma is full of data, but much of it tells us what happened (clicks, time spent in-app, fill rates). Behavior mapping helps us understand why it happened. And that makes all the difference.
A company developed a device, similar to an inhaler, and ran successful trials. In the clinic, patients used it correctly with nurses’ guidance. But once it launched and was used at home, complaints poured in. Patients were choking when using it.
Why? Because they instinctively used it like a traditional inhaler, taking a deep breath, which delivered the drug too fast. This issue didn’t surface in clinical trials because clinical settings provided coaching that wasn’t available at home.
Behavior mapping helped the company finally understand what was going wrong, by asking who is doing what, when, where, how, and why.
That’s why behavior mapping matters: it closes the gap between what we assume and what’s actually happening.
It’s tempting to think of “taking medication” as a single, simple step, but in reality, it’s made up of many smaller actions: seeing a doctor, filling a prescription, remembering to take it, managing side effects, and more.
How behavior mapping helps: It breaks these behaviors down into their component parts, so teams can spot where friction hides, and design interventions that address the actual barriers.
Pharma sometimes borrows ideas from other industries, conditions, or therapy areas, without considering patient context. Daily reminders, for example, might work for dentist appointments but become background noise for a daily medication.
How behavior mapping helps: It shows when, where, and for whom an intervention will actually work, making sure solutions are tailored to real-world use, not just lifted from “best practices.”
There’s often a belief that non-adherence means patients just need better education. But in many cases, patients already know, their behavior is shaped by other factors: beliefs, access, affordability, forgetfulness.
How behavior mapping helps: It uncovers the real root causes, so teams avoid wasting time and money on information-heavy interventions that don’t address the real problem.
There’s a pull toward high-tech, feature-rich solutions that look impressive but may not match patient needs or context. Sometimes, a well-timed text message beats an expensive, underused app.
How behavior mapping helps: It encourages teams to focus on what’s likely to work best, whether that’s a simple or complex solution, ensuring effectiveness takes priority over sophistication.
Behavior mapping gives pharma teams a way to cut through assumptions and really understand patient behavior. It doesn’t just complement patient experience mapping, it fills in its biggest gaps.
In part two, I’ll walk through the key steps in applying this approach effectively.
Want to see how behavioral science transforms digital health solutions? Watch this video where some of our consultants explain how understanding people — and the many factors influencing their behavior — makes interventions more effective and engaging.