A collaborative visualization tool for identifying strategic core domains in software architecture to align business and technical priorities.
Core Domain Charts is a collaborative visualization tool that helps software teams identify and prioritize core domains—strategic business differentiators—within their architecture. It plots domains based on their complexity and business differentiation to guide architectural decisions and resource allocation. The tool fosters alignment between technical and business stakeholders by making strategic trade-offs visible.
Software architects, engineering leaders, product managers, and business stakeholders involved in domain-driven design, strategic planning, or sociotechnical architecture. It is particularly useful for teams practicing DDD or using frameworks like Team Topologies.
It provides a simple yet powerful visual framework to bridge the gap between business strategy and technical implementation, helping teams focus investment on high-ROI domains. Unlike generic mapping tools, it is specifically designed for DDD contexts and integrates with established patterns like Wardley Mapping and Team Topologies.
A tool for collaboratively finding your core domains - strategic business differentiators
Open-Awesome is built by the community, for the community. Submit a project, suggest an awesome list, or help improve the catalog on GitHub.
Provides a clear chart template to plot domains based on complexity and business differentiation, as shown in the core-domain-chart-template.jpg, helping identify core domains for focused investment.
Triggers conversations between engineers and product managers by combining technical complexity with business differentiation insights, fostering alignment across disciplines as emphasized in the README.
Supports domain portfolio mapping, context mapping with Team Topologies, and architecture migration planning, detailed in the 'How to Use' section with examples like architecture migration charts.
Complements Domain-Driven Design patterns and Team Topologies, enhancing sociotechnical architecture alignment and making it a natural fit for teams practicing these methodologies.
The README admits that measuring complexity and differentiation is hard and subjective, relying on qualitative discussions rather than objective metrics, which can lead to inconsistent assessments.
It is a conceptual technique without built-in software tools, requiring manual creation and facilitation of charts, which can be time-consuming and lack automation for scaling.
While it provides guiding questions for assessment, it lacks detailed step-by-step tutorials or tools for implementation, leaving teams to navigate nuances on their own.