Skip to content This library is free, offered as dana. If it helps your work, donate here →
penguin tree ai
← back to libraryDonate here

This is one of 3,622 free prompts in the penguin tree ai library. Sign up once and the whole library opens, with new prompts by email.

open the library →

Customer effort score diagnostic

Analyzes a described customer journey or service interaction to locate high-effort friction points, scores each on a 7-point Customer Effort Score scale, ranks friction sources by impact and fixability, and delivers…

download .md

Purpose

Pinpoint exactly where a customer journey forces too much work, score each friction point on the Customer Effort Score framework, and deliver a ranked set of low-effort redesign options — so CX teams fix the specific moments driving disloyalty rather than guessing.

When to Use

Invoke this skill when the user asks to:

  • Diagnose why customers complain about a service or support experience being "hard"
  • Audit a support flow, onboarding sequence, or self-service journey for friction
  • Interpret or act on Customer Effort Score survey results
  • Reduce contact volume, repeat contacts, or channel-switching in a service journey
  • Identify which friction point to fix first when resources are limited
  • Redesign a specific interaction (returns, password reset, billing dispute, cancellation) to lower effort

Inputs Required

Before starting, collect:

  • Journey or interaction description: The step-by-step flow the customer goes through, in the customer's shoes
  • Channels involved: Phone, chat, email, self-service portal, app, in-person, or combinations
  • Current CES data: Existing CES scores, verbatims, or survey results if available
  • Known pain signals: Complaints, escalation reasons, repeat-contact reasons, drop-off points
  • Volume/context: How many customers hit this journey and how often
  • Constraints: Systems, budget, or policy limits on what can be changed
  • Success metric: What "better" looks like — lower CES, fewer contacts, higher resolution rate

If current CES data is missing, run the diagnostic on effort signals and flag where a CES survey should be instrumented.

Instructions

Step 1: Map the Journey Into Effort Stages

Break the described interaction into discrete stages a customer actually experiences. For each stage, note:

  • The customer's goal at that stage (what they're trying to accomplish)
  • The action required of them (what they must do)
  • The channel they're in
  • Any transition (channel switch, handoff, wait, or repeat) — these are the highest-effort moments

Flag every point where the customer must repeat information, switch channels, wait, hunt for information, or take an action the company could have removed.

Step 2: Identify Friction Points Against the 7 Effort Drivers

Screen each stage for these known high-effort drivers:

  • Channel switching: Forced to move from self-service to a live channel (or across live channels)
  • Repeating information: Re-stating account details, the problem, or context already given
  • Transfers and handoffs: Passed between agents, teams, or systems
  • Waiting: Hold time, queue time, response-time gaps, or delayed resolution
  • Hunting: Searching for information, the right contact, or the next step
  • Policy/process friction: Rules that force extra steps (forms, approvals, verification loops)
  • Generic or wrong routing: Being sent somewhere that can't resolve the issue

Name each friction point specifically — "customer must re-verify identity after being transferred from chat to phone" — not "identity verification is hard."

Step 3: Score Each Friction Point on the CES Scale

Apply the standard 7-point Customer Effort Score framing ("The company made it easy for me to handle my issue" — 1 Strongly Disagree to 7 Strongly Agree). For each friction point, assign:

  • Effort rating: The likely CES contribution (1–7, where lower = higher effort)
  • Effort type: Physical (steps/actions), cognitive (figuring it out), or emotional (frustration/anxiety)
  • Evidence basis: What signal supports this rating — verbatim, drop-off data, or driver inference
  • Loyalty risk: How this moment affects likelihood to churn, complain, or switch

Step 4: Rank Friction Points by Impact and Fixability

Build a 2-factor ranking:

  • Impact: Volume of customers affected × severity of effort × loyalty risk
  • Fixability: Effort and constraint required to change it (Quick fix / Moderate / Structural)

Prioritize in this order: high-impact/quick-fix first, then high-impact/structural, then low-impact/quick-fix. Explicitly deprioritize low-impact/structural.

Step 5: Prescribe Low-Effort Redesign Options

For each of the top-ranked friction points, provide a concrete redesign using the effort-reduction hierarchy:

  1. Eliminate the step entirely (best outcome — removed effort is zero effort)
  2. Preempt the need (resolve before the customer has to ask — proactive messaging, defaults)
  3. Automate or self-serve (make the low-effort path the default path)
  4. Streamline (fewer clicks, no re-entry, warm transfers with context carried forward)
  5. Set expectations (if effort can't be removed, reduce perceived effort with clear guidance)

Each redesign must name what changes, which system or team owns it, and the effort driver it removes.

Step 6: Sequence the Fixes

Deliver an ordered implementation plan: what to fix first (highest impact, lowest effort), what to instrument or measure, and what CES improvement to expect. Note any friction point that should be validated with a CES survey before redesign.

Output Format

  • Structure: Journey map → friction point inventory → scored/ranked table → redesign prescriptions → sequenced plan
  • Length: 900–1,300 words
  • Format: Structured document with a scored friction table and prose redesign prescriptions
  • Sections: Journey Effort Map → Friction Points Identified → CES-Scored Ranking Table → Redesign Recommendations → Implementation Sequence
  • Tone: CX diagnostic lead — evidence-driven, specific, prioritizes action over theory

Quality Checklist

Before delivering output, verify:

  • [ ] Every friction point is named specifically to a moment in the journey — not stated as a general theme
  • [ ] Each friction point is scored on the 1–7 CES scale with an effort type and evidence basis
  • [ ] The ranking uses both impact and fixability — not effort score alone
  • [ ] Each top-ranked friction point has a redesign that names which level of the effort-reduction hierarchy it applies
  • [ ] The implementation sequence leads with high-impact/quick-fix items
  • [ ] Where CES data is missing, the output flags exactly where to instrument a survey

Notes

  • The single strongest predictor of disloyalty is high effort — one hard interaction damages loyalty more than a delightful one repairs it. Weight loyalty risk accordingly.
  • Channel switching and repeating information are the two most common and most damaging effort drivers; check for them first.
  • Eliminating a step almost always beats optimizing it — push every redesign toward the top of the hierarchy before settling for streamlining.
  • When a journey spans multiple channels, effort accumulates across handoffs even when each individual step looks acceptable in isolation.

How to use this skill

This file is a Claude Code skill in Anthropic's standard format — markdown with YAML frontmatter at the top.

Installing in Claude Code:

  • ~/.claude/skills/<folder-name>/SKILL.md — auto-loads in every session anywhere on your machine (recommended for skills you'll use across multiple projects)
  • <your-project>/.claude/skills/<folder-name>/SKILL.md — auto-loads only when working in that project (recommended for project-specific skills)

Restart Claude Code or open a new session to register.

Using in Claude.ai, ChatGPT, Gemini, or other AI tools:

  1. Drag this file into a new chat, or copy and paste its contents
  2. Send your task or request as your next message — the AI will apply the skill where it fits

For Claude Code skill details: https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code/skills