After more than 15 hours of travel — layovers included — from Europe to South America, plus the usual cocktail of jetlag, emotional exhaustion, and excitement of going home… all I wanted was to hug my family and collapse into bed.
And eventually, do it all again in reverse, back to Europe.
My goal was simple: avoid the immigration line, embrace my family as quickly as possible, and find a bed where I could sleep for many hours. Anything that could reduce friction in that final stretch of my journey was more than welcome.
Experience Memory Outcome
Pleasant, and smooth, and satisfying. You remember the good parts first. You’d absolutely do it again and recommend it—with just a few suggestions for improvement. The technology is well applied, reduces friction in the entry/exit process, and represents a good mix between innovation and human support.
What is the Experience Memory Outcome?
It reflects the emotional aftertaste of an entire journey—not just what worked, but what stayed with you. It’s a framework I’ve been developing over the past few years, combining 8 human-tech interaction criteria to capture how usability, trust, and technology readiness and data transparency come together in one memorable (or not) experience. Outcome levels: 😍 Still Smiling, 😊 That Was Nice, 😌 Glad It Worked, 😕 Almost Worth It, 😩 Wish I Hadn’t
the Experience
A few years ago, several airports implemented biometric data—in my case, iris scanning—as an alternative to the traditional immigration process. The promise was simple: avoid lines, reduce unnecessary human contact, and streamline border crossing. I decided to register to skip the line and see if it was truly worth it.
The process was straightforward: I registered in the biometric system. Upon arrival, all I had to do was enter my identification number into a machine, look at the camera, and voilà: the doors opened. I passed through in a matter of seconds, while the traditional line was, as always, endless.
However, the time I saved there was lost waiting for my luggage (more than 30 minutes—so long that my free Wi-Fi ran out).
Leaving the country was also interesting: the process includes two steps.
The first is scanning your boarding pass in a machine that grants access regardless of whether you have your iris registered. This was a moment of surprise because I thought it would only apply to those registered.
The second, you scan your passport, enter your flight number, and finally, your face gets scanned to unlock the next gate. One step closer to your boarding gate and the duty-free (closed, in my case, when I arrived — a tragedy I’m still not over).
the YEAHs.
Real time savings. Scan, look, walk through. No queue, no stress.
Interoperability between traditional and digital. The traditional process isn’t eliminated, it’s integrated. The experience recognizes that not all travelers have the same level of familiarity, or trust with this process.
Human assistance. Available at all phases for those who need it, reducing anxiety and friction.
(perception) Less cognitive load for border agents. The flow felt optimized both for users and staff.
the NOPEs.
The time saved was lost waiting for luggage — neutralizing the emotional impact of that quick immigration win.
System overlap. Some parts of the journey still rely on the traditional flow, and the lack of synchronization between old and new creates friction.
Unclear info for foreign travelers — especially for those of us traveling with foreigners—it’s not clear what they can or cannot do, whether they can register or not, or if it’s possible to do so only when leaving the country.
how the Experience could Improve
💡 Clear and contextualized communication: What does the “iris reading” process consist of? What are the requirements? What benefits do I really have? Tell me clearly, early — not mid-queue or too late to act.
💡 Privacy and handling of my biometric data: Where will my data be used? At what stage? Let me opt in early in the journey (ideally while researching travel requirements) and explain why it’s worth it.
💡 Extend the digital experience to baggage handling, because optimizing entry doesn’t help much if the baggage system remains a bottleneck. Note: my experience would have been different if I had traveled only with carry-on luggage.
Juliana Onate-Berrocal 
Leave a comment