CONVERSION

Signup to first value friction map

Use when signups look healthy but few accounts ever reach the point where the product is useful.

signup-to-first-value-friction-map.md

Download .md

You are mapping the path from account creation to the first moment the product is useful. You are not writing onboarding copy or proposing new features.

SIGNUP AND SETUP STEPS IN ORDER: {{SETUP_STEPS}}
WHAT COUNTS AS FIRST VALUE FOR THIS PRODUCT: {{FIRST_VALUE_EVENT}}
SHARE OF SIGNUPS REACHING EACH STEP IF KNOWN: {{STEP_COMPLETION}}
WHAT THE USER MUST SUPPLY OR CONNECT: {{REQUIRED_INPUTS}}

Output a table: Step | Required or skippable | What it demands (time, data, a decision, another person) | Blocks {{FIRST_VALUE_EVENT}}? | Could it move to after first value?

Then produce:
1. The shortest honest path to {{FIRST_VALUE_EVENT}}, listing only the steps that cannot be deferred, with the reason each one survives.
2. Every item in {{REQUIRED_INPUTS}} that depends on somebody other than the person signing up, such as a developer, an admin, or whoever holds the billing card. These are the real stalls, so name the workaround for each.
3. Where an empty state, sample data, or a sensible default would let the user reach value before supplying anything.
4. What to measure per step given {{STEP_COMPLETION}}, and which gap you would investigate first.

Constraints: work only from {{SETUP_STEPS}} and do not add steps you assume exist. Do not offer a product tour, a checklist widget, or a welcome video as the fix for a step that is structurally slow. If a step is required for legal or billing reasons, say so and leave it. No em dashes.

Fill in before running

Replace each placeholder with your own detail. The more specific you are, the less the model invents.

{{SETUP_STEPS}}
{{FIRST_VALUE_EVENT}}
{{STEP_COMPLETION}}
{{REQUIRED_INPUTS}}

Getting a better result

Define first value as an event you can query, not as a feeling, or the whole map is unmeasurable.
The steps needing a second person are usually where the week goes; count them separately.
Re-run it for a self serve signup and an invited team member, since the paths differ more than people expect.

Questions about this prompt

When do I map the path rather than improve onboarding copy?

When signups look healthy but few accounts ever do the thing the product exists for. It maps only account creation to first value and refuses to write onboarding copy or propose features, which keeps the discussion on what to defer rather than what to add. Run it before anyone commissions a product tour.

What do I need in front of me before running it?

The setup steps in order, a first value event you can query rather than a feeling, the share of signups reaching each step, and everything the user must supply or connect. A loosely defined first value makes the whole map unmeasurable, so settle that first and check the event actually fires.

What comes back, and which part is worth acting on?

A step table, the shortest honest path with a reason each surviving step cannot be deferred, and the required inputs that depend on somebody else. That dependency list is where the week goes: a developer, an admin, or whoever holds the billing card. Each comes with a workaround, and those are what to argue about internally.

What is the mistake that costs me here?

Answering a structurally slow step with a tour, a checklist widget or a welcome video. The prompt refuses those because none of them shorten a step that needs another person. Run it separately for a self serve signup and for an invited team member, since the two paths diverge more than most teams expect.