View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Domain Modeling Context Map |  Product Discovery Pretotyping |  Domain Modeling Domain Context Map |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When several contexts need to talk to each other, it makes their relationships and dependencies legible. It helps sort integration pressure and responsibilities across system boundaries. | Pretotyping clarifies whether a customer problem and solution idea create enough real demand. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence, and captures the result as a pretotyping sketch, test setup, and conversion data. | When a domain model and its associated contexts need to be thought through together, it creates a shared overview. It connects the business view and organizational boundary into a readable whole. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | Stunden bis wenige Tage | 1-3 h | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-4 | 3-10 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Context Map, Integration Patterns, Boundary Notes | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision | Domain Context Map, Boundary Notes, Ownership Map | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | Domain-Driven DesignBoundariesStrategy | ValidationDemandMVP | Domain-Driven DesignContextBoundaries | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |