Context Map
A diagram of the bounded contexts in a system and the relationship type between each pair, making integration expectations and power dynamics explicit.
Bounded contexts define where models are internally consistent. The context map documents what happens between them, which is where integration difficulty actually lives.
The relationship patterns, each with different obligations:
Partnership — two teams succeed or fail together and coordinate closely. Expensive; appropriate only where the coupling is genuine.
Customer–supplier — the downstream context's needs are on the upstream team's backlog. Requires the upstream team to accept that obligation.
Conformist — the downstream adopts the upstream model wholesale, because it has no influence. Cheapest, and it imports the upstream's concepts permanently.
Anti-corruption layer — the downstream translates the upstream model into its own. The right answer when the upstream model is foreign or legacy, at the cost of a translation layer.
Shared kernel — a shared subset of the model, which must be changed by agreement. Powerful and dangerous, because it couples release cycles.
Open host service and published language — the upstream publishes a stable interface designed for many consumers. The right shape for a widely-used platform capability.
The value of drawing it is that it makes team relationships and power dynamics explicit. "Conformist" is not merely a technical choice; it records that a team has no leverage — which is often the real constraint on a design and is otherwise never written down.