When it comes to Collaborative Modelling (CoMo), simplicity and adaptability are often perceived as defining strengths, but this notion of "just adapting on the fly" can be misleading. Many CoMo methods are deceptively simple, creating false confidence in their effortless adaptability across various scenarios. However, the high level of collaboration and intrinsic motivation required from participants demands meticulous preparation, especially when the goal is hard to pinpoint, politics are involved or resistance to change can be expected.

Target Audience: (Collaborative Modelling) Workshop Facilitators
Prerequisites:Knowing at least the theory of collaborative modelling techniques
Level: Practicing

Extended Abstract:
When it comes to Collaborative Modelling (CoMo), simplicity and adaptability are often perceived as defining strengths, but this notion of "just adapting on the fly" can be misleading. Many CoMo methods are deceptively simple, creating false confidence in their effortless adaptability across various scenarios. However, the high level of collaboration and intrinsic motivation required from participants demands meticulous preparation.

This talk will provide valuable insights on how to prepare for collaborative modelling workshops especially when dealing with big groups and/or environments where the goal is hard to pinpoint, politics are involved or resistance to change can be expected. Throughout the talk you will learn how to find a shared understanding of the workshop's goal, what it means to be aware of hidden agendas and group dynamics, and how to make sure all relevant stakeholders are on the same page. The presentation will further cover how to design a fitting storyline across the different formats or methods being used.

Furthermore, the talk will introduce the “CoMo Prep Canvas” - a tool developed in collaboration with Michael Plöd - to guide both new and experienced facilitators through a structured preparation process. You will learn how to use the canvas not only to ask the right questions to important stakeholders but also to make your own assumptions tangible during the preparation.

Domain-Driven Design (DDD) promotes flexible architectures built around bounded contexts and domain events. In contrast, industry blueprints like TM Forum’s Open Digital Architecture (ODA, www.tmforum.org/oda/about) push standard APIs and business object models for enterprise IT modernization. On this example subject, the talk confronts industry standardisation ideas with DDD principles: are such blueprints the ultimate domain-driven anti-pattern or a foundation for synergy between open standards and domain-centric thinking?

Target Audience: Architects, developers, deciders faced with large-scale enterprise landscapes
Prerequisites:no fear of business data and APIs
Level: Practicing

Extended Abstract:
Modern software architecture in larger organisations often sits at the crossroads of two competing forces: flexibility driven by Domain-Driven Design (DDD) and the push for standardization via open industry blueprints. In this talk, after introducing prominent[A1]  industry model representatives, we explore this tension by comparing the core ideas of DDD with a widely adopted model in the telecommunications industry: TM Forum’s Open Digital Architecture (ODA).

Note that ODA is only used as role model for industry blueprints. E.g. the resource models for concepts like Party or Agreement resemble similar concepts in most other industry blueprints. Although the presenter is most familiar with telecommunications, cross-references to other models and tips how to extend ideas to your industry will be given.

We will challenge the following areas:

Bounded Contexts:

DDD promotes explicit boundaries where business concepts can be modelled differently depending on the domain. ODA appears to flatten these differences by offering canonical models. The talk shows how architectural clarity can be retained by treating ODA components as syntactic building blocks, not universal truths - saving modelling efforts.

Ubiquitous Language:

While DDD requires a co-created, evolving vocabulary, ODA provides a pre-defined business language. This talk argues that ODA’s terminology can jump-start communication across domains, but needs contextualization to serve as a true ubiquitous language.

Aggregates & Extensibility:

ODA’s resource models function similarly to aggregates and are designed for schema extension. Applied in the right way, extensibility is the key to preserve domain integrity while remaining compatible with industry APIs.

Domain Events:

ODA defines "change events" for its resources, but these are often too generic for rich domain use. This talk presents how to refine them into meaningful domain events that express intent and drive business workflows.

Strategic Design & Integration:

Implementers should adopt ODA selectively—embracing its data models while layering DDD-style command and query APIs. Strategic patterns like Anti-Corruption Layers help to mitigate between legacy, individual system views and ODA (over)abstractions.

Industry blueprints and DDD are not opposites. With careful interpretation and design discipline, they can reinforce each other to build systems that are both interoperable and deeply aligned to business intent

 [A1]prominent?