Quick Reference: Communication (Domain 7)

Fast-track refresher for Domain 7. Communication is independently scored across your entire board performance — there is no separate “communication section.” Judges assess how you present, defend, and adapt throughout.

Domain 7 Objectives at a Glance

Objective	What Judges Evaluate	How It Shows Up
7.1 Articulate benefits, limitations, and design choices	Every time you explain a decision	Presentation + Q&A
7.2 Use visualization and documentation tools	Diagram quality, readability, labeling	Artifacts review
7.3 Handle unexpected roadblocks	When judges introduce new constraints	Q&A challenges

The meta-skill

Communication is the only domain scored purely on how you deliver, not what you deliver. A technically sound solution presented poorly can fail Domain 7. A good solution presented clearly and confidently will score well.

The Three-Act Presentation Structure

flowchart LR
    subgraph "Act 1 (3-5 min)"
        A1[Business Context]
        A2[Critical Requirements]
        A3[Assumptions]
        A4[Approach Preview]
    end
    subgraph "Act 2 (25-35 min)"
        B1[System Landscape]
        B2[Data Model]
        B3[Integration]
        B4[Security & Identity]
        B5[Licenses & Roles]
        B6[Migration]
        B7[Governance & DevOps]
        B8[Risks]
    end
    subgraph "Act 3 (2-3 min)"
        C1[Top 3 Decisions Recap]
        C2[Key Trade-offs]
        C3[7-Domain Sweep]
    end
    A1 --> A2 --> A3 --> A4 --> B1 --> B2 --> B3 --> B4 --> B5 --> B6 --> B7 --> B8 --> C1 --> C2 --> C3

Artifact Time Budget (45-Minute Presentation)

Time rollover rule

The presentation has a fixed 45-minute allocation. Any unused presentation time automatically rolls into the 40-minute Q&A session — this is a structural rule, not an intentional buffer strategy. Plan to use the full 45 minutes.

Artifact	Minutes	What to Cover
Opening — business context, requirements, assumptions	3-5	Frame the problem like a CXO briefing
System Landscape	4-5	All systems, roles, interactions, protocols
Data Model	4-5	Key objects, relationships, cardinality, LDV
Integration Architecture	4-5	Data flows, sync/async, error handling
Security & Identity	3-4	Auth, sharing model, portal security
Actors & Licenses	2-3	User types, license recommendations
Role Hierarchy	2-3	Sharing model, territory mgmt
Data Migration	2-3	Strategy, tools, sequencing
Governance & DevOps	3-4	Environments, CI/CD, release strategy
Risks & Mitigations	2-3	Top risks with concrete mitigations
Closing — recap, trade-offs, 7-domain sweep	2-3	Leave judges with a clear mental model

The “Because” Framework

Every decision statement must include a scenario-specific reason.

Weak	Strong
”I chose MuleSoft"	"I chose MuleSoft because the scenario has 6 external systems needing shared transformations and the client has MuleSoft expertise"
"I recommend a single org"	"I recommend a single org because all 3 BUs share customers, need unified reporting, and data volume is within governor limits"
"I added a CDN"	"To meet the 2-second page load SLA across 15 global offices, I introduced a CDN layer for static assets”

Pass vs. Fail Communication Signals

Passing	Failing
Every solution tied to a requirement	Solutions described without context
Proactively identifies trade-offs	Only mentions trade-offs when asked
Adapts when challenged with new info	Rigidly defends everything
Concise answers, stays on time	Rambles, repeats, runs out of time
Clean, labeled diagrams with legends	Cluttered or unreadable diagrams
Acknowledges gaps honestly	Bluffs or gives vague answers
Balances business and technical language	Only speaks in technical jargon

The 7-Domain Sweep Technique

In your closing, confirm all 7 domains are addressed with a one-sentence summary each. This guarantees no domain gets a zero score.

“Let me confirm I’ve addressed all seven domains: For System Architecture, I recommend a single org with Sales and Service Cloud. For Security, I’ve designed an SSO flow with SAML and a role hierarchy supporting data isolation. For Data, I’ve addressed LDV with skinny tables and archival…”

The domain zero trap

Judges score each domain independently. A zero in any single domain can fail you regardless of how strong you are everywhere else. Even a brief mention in your sweep is better than silence.

Reverse-Engineered Use Cases

Use Case 1: The Defensive Q&A Failure

Situation: A candidate designed a point-to-point integration approach. A judge asked “Why not middleware?” The candidate got defensive: “Point-to-point is fine for this.”

What went wrong: No trade-off articulation, no acknowledgment of the valid alternative.

What to do instead: “I considered middleware. For this scenario with only 2 external systems and simple data flows, point-to-point reduces cost and complexity. If the client adds more systems in phase 2, I would revisit and introduce middleware at that point.”

Use Case 2: The Mid-Presentation Correction

Situation: While presenting the data model, a candidate realized they had the wrong relationship type between two objects.

What to do: Correct it openly. “On reflection, this should be a master-detail relationship, not a lookup, because we need cascade delete and roll-up summaries for the invoice line items. Let me update that.” Judges respect self-correction over stubbornly defending a mistake.

Use Case 3: The Time Management Save

Situation: A candidate spent 20 minutes on system landscape and data model, leaving only 15 minutes for 5 remaining artifacts plus closing.

What to do: Summarize remaining artifacts at a higher level (1-2 minutes each), then use the 7-domain sweep in your close. Prepare deeper detail for Q&A instead. A complete but concise presentation scores better than a half-finished detailed one.

Deep-Dive References

Review Board Presentation & Q&A Strategies — full guide to structuring your presentation and handling Q&A
Communication Best Practices — delivery, diagrams, time management, anti-patterns
Communication Decision Guides — decision flowcharts for time, diagrams, Q&A
Communication Trade-offs — depth vs. breadth, technical vs. business language
Presentation Flow & Q&A Quick-Reference