How do you define entry and exit criteria for journeys?
Strong entry and exit criteria keep your journeys from turning into noisy automation. They clarify who should start which experience, what must be true to advance or exit, and how each journey connects to pipeline, revenue, and customer value.
A clear definition of journey entry and exit criteria
Entry and exit criteria are the observable conditions that control when a person, account, or opportunity starts, progresses through, or leaves a journey. Entry criteria describe the who and when—segment, intent, channel, and signal thresholds that must be met to enroll. Exit criteria describe the outcome—what must happen to declare success or failure and hand off to the next motion. Well-governed criteria are explicit, data-driven, mutually exclusive across journeys, and mapped to measurable outcomes such as pipeline created, win rate, ARR, retention, and expansion.
What “good” entry and exit criteria look like
The journey entry and exit criteria playbook
Use this sequence to align teams on journey ownership, remove noisy enrollments, and connect every journey to a clear revenue story.
From uncontrolled flows to governed journeys
Define → Map → Instrument → Govern → Optimize
- Define journey scope and purpose. Name the journey (for example, “Net-new acquisition & MQL→SQL” or “Onboarding & time-to-value”), specify the audience (person, account, customer type), and agree on the primary outcome metric.
- Map candidate entry and exit signals. List the fields and events that indicate readiness to enter (fit + intent + channel) and the business conditions that indicate exit (stage change, decision, milestone, or timeout).
- Translate signals into explicit rules. Turn “we care about engaged ICP buyers” into boolean logic: ICP fit tier, job function, intent topic, engagement score, product usage events, and suppression logic for customers, partners, and employees.
- Implement rules in systems of record. Configure criteria in MAP, CRM, CDP, or journey tools. Ensure routing, ownership, and SLAs are aligned so Sales and CS know what to do when someone exits.
- Instrument measurement and health. Track enrollments, exits by path (success, fail, timeout), time-in-journey, and downstream revenue KPIs. Build a dashboard that journeys owners review on a cadence.
- Optimize thresholds and branching. Experiment with tighter or looser criteria, additional branches (for example, high-intent express lane), and smarter suppression to protect customer experience while preserving volume.
Journey entry and exit criteria maturity matrix
| Capability | From (Ad Hoc) | To (Operationalized) | Owner | Primary KPI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journey catalog | Scattered campaigns; no shared list of journeys | Documented journey catalog with audience, purpose, owner, and SLAs | RevOps / Marketing Ops | Coverage by ICP segment |
| Entry criteria | “Added to list” or manual enrollment | Signal-based, mutually exclusive, system-enforced entry rules | Journey Owner / Marketing | Qualified enrollments, false-positive rate |
| Exit criteria | Contacts stay in journeys indefinitely | Clear success, fail, and timeout exits mapped to lifecycle stages | Journey Owner / Sales / CS | Conversion rate by exit path |
| Conflict management | Contacts in multiple conflicting journeys | Priority rules and suppressions; one “primary” journey at a time | RevOps | Overlap rate, complaint rate |
| Measurement & governance | Channel-only reporting | Journey-level dashboards reviewed in a recurring growth or revenue council | Analytics / RevOps | Pipeline & revenue influenced per journey |
| Experimentation | One-off tweaks | Structured tests on thresholds, branches, and suppression logic | Journey Owner / Growth | Lift in conversion and velocity |
Client snapshot: Cleaning up noisy journeys
A B2B SaaS company had dozens of overlapping journeys triggering on basic list membership. Prospects received conflicting offers, and Sales ignored “MQLs” that were mostly recycled leads. After defining explicit entry and exit criteria for a consolidated set of journeys, they:
- Cut noisy enrollments by 40% while increasing qualified entries
- Reduced average time-in-journey by 25%
- Improved MQL→SQL conversion and opportunity win rate
By tying journey exits to lifecycle stages and opportunity outcomes, Marketing, Sales, and CS could finally see which plays were truly moving revenue.
Use explicit entry and exit criteria to connect every journey to The Loop™ and RM6™—so you can prove which motions create pipeline, accelerate deals, and protect customer experience.
Frequently asked questions about journey entry and exit criteria
Operationalize journey entry and exit criteria
We’ll help you catalog your journeys, define signal-based entry and exit criteria, and align them with RM6™ and The Loop™ so every journey has a clear revenue story.