Case Study: Modeling an End-to-End Business Scenario Across Diagram Types

When you’re trying to map a real business process, one diagram rarely tells the whole story. I’ve seen teams waste weeks trying to force all details into a single process diagram—only to lose clarity and stakeholder buy-in.

The truth is, different audiences need different views. A developer needs executable logic. A manager wants to see who’s responsible. A partner needs to know what messages are exchanged.

This is why a BPMN multi diagram case study isn’t just useful—it’s essential. It shows how to model a single scenario across multiple diagram types: process, collaboration, choreography, and conversation. Each view answers a different question, and together they form a complete picture.

In this chapter, I walk through a real claims handling process from an insurance provider. We’ll start with a detailed internal process, then expand it into collaboration and choreography views, and finally summarize it with a conversation diagram. All using Visual Paradigm to maintain consistency and traceability.

By the end, you’ll know how to choose the right diagram type for your goal, avoid common modeling traps, and keep your models aligned—no matter how complex the process.

Step 1: Start with a Process Diagram – The Internal Workflow

Every end-to-end modeling effort begins with the internal sequence of activities. For claims handling, that means mapping what happens inside the insurer’s claims department.

We start with a private process diagram. It shows the journey from claim submission to settlement, with clear start and end events, tasks, gateways, and data flows.

Key elements in this diagram:

• Start Event: Claim submitted via web portal.
• Task: Initial validation (automated).
• Exclusive Gateway: Is the claim valid? Yes → assign to adjuster. No → reject with reason.
• Task: Adjuster reviews documentation and assesses liability.
• Parallel Gateway: Request medical records and contact witnesses.
• Task: Determine settlement amount.
• End Event: Claim approved or denied.

At this stage, we’re focused on internal logic. No external parties are shown—this is a private process. The goal is to document the workflow for internal teams and prepare for automation.

Visual Paradigm makes this easy. I use the “Process Diagram” template, drag in the elements, and connect them with sequence flows. I name each task clearly: “Validate Claim,” “Assign to Adjuster,” etc. I avoid vague labels like “Process” or “Handle.”

Once the process is complete, I validate it using Visual Paradigm’s built-in rules. It flags any missing events, orphaned gateways, or unconnected flows—critical for catching errors early.

Step 2: Add a Collaboration Diagram – Mapping Interactions

Now we shift perspective. Who else is involved?

The claim isn’t just handled internally. It requires input from the claimant, medical providers, and sometimes third-party investigators. This is where a collaboration diagram shines.

We create a new diagram and add three pools:

• Insurance Company (internal)
• Claimant (external)
• Medical Provider (external)

Each pool represents a participant with its own responsibilities. Inside the Insurance Company pool, we reuse the same tasks from the process diagram. But now, we show message flows between pools.

For example:

• After initial validation, a message is sent to the Claimant: “Please provide additional medical records.”
• After receiving records, a message is sent to the Medical Provider: “Verify patient history.”
• Once the adjuster makes a decision, a message is sent to the Claimant: “Your claim has been approved.”

These message flows clarify responsibilities. They show that the claimant doesn’t perform the validation—they only respond to requests.

Visual Paradigm lets me link the collaboration diagram back to the process diagram. When I double-click a task in the collaboration view, it opens the corresponding process element. This ensures consistency and prevents duplication.

One mistake I’ve seen teams make: mixing sequence flows and message flows between pools. That’s a red flag. Sequence flows stay inside a pool. Message flows cross pool boundaries. Always keep them separate.

Step 3: Model the Choreography – Defining Expected Behavior

Now we go one level higher. Instead of showing internal steps, we define the expected sequence of messages between participants.

This is a choreography diagram. It doesn’t care how the insurer validates a claim—it only cares about the order of messages exchanged.

We set up the same three participants: Insurance Company, Claimant, and Medical Provider. But now, we use choreography tasks.

Each choreography task represents a message exchange:

• Claimant → Insurance Company: “Submit Claim”
• Insurance Company → Claimant: “Request Medical Records”
• Medical Provider → Insurance Company: “Provide Patient History”
• Insurance Company → Claimant: “Approve Claim”

Notice: no internal activities. No gateways. Just message exchanges in sequence.

Choreography diagrams are powerful for contracts. They define what each party must do and in what order. If the insurer fails to send the request for records, it’s a breach—regardless of internal steps.

Visual Paradigm supports choreography with dedicated notation. I use the “Choreography Task” shape and connect them with choreography sequence flows. I also assign roles: “Initiating Participant” for the Claimant, “Non-Initiating” for the others.

This view is especially useful when integrating with external systems. It becomes a formal specification for API contracts or service-level agreements.

Step 4: Create a Conversation Diagram – The Big Picture

Finally, we step back. Who talks to whom? What are the main communication topics?

This is where a conversation diagram comes in. It’s not about details—it’s about clarity.

We create a high-level map with three conversation nodes:

• Claim Submission: Claimant → Insurance Company
• Document Verification: Insurance Company ↔ Medical Provider
• Settlement Notification: Insurance Company → Claimant

Each node represents a distinct communication topic. We connect them to the participants using conversation links.

Why do this? Because executives and partners don’t need to see every task. They want to know: “Who’s talking to whom, and about what?”

Visual Paradigm lets me link each conversation node back to the underlying collaboration or choreography diagram. Clicking on “Document Verification” opens the collaboration view between the insurer and medical provider.

This creates a navigable, multi-layered model. No more “where is this?” confusion.

How to Maintain Consistency Across Diagrams

Here’s the real challenge: keeping all these views aligned. I’ve seen models where a task was named “Review Claim” in one diagram and “Assess Liability” in another. Confusion. Delay. Blame.

My rule: reuse elements, not recreate them.

Use Visual Paradigm’s Element Reuse feature. Define a task once—say, “Validate Claim”—and use it across multiple diagrams. When you update it, all references update automatically.

Also, use a shared Participant List. Define all pools once in the project repository. Then, when you add a new diagram, just select from the list. No typos. No inconsistent names.

Here’s a simple checklist to avoid drift:

1. Use consistent naming across all diagrams.
2. Link each diagram to its source (e.g., process → collaboration).
3. Review all message flows for direction and purpose.
4. Validate that every choreography task has a corresponding message.
5. Ensure conversation nodes map to real interactions in lower-level diagrams.

When you follow this, your models stay truthful, traceable, and trustworthy.

Why This Approach Works

Let’s summarize what we’ve built:

Diagram Type	Focus	Primary Audience	Use Case
Process Diagram	Internal sequence of activities	Process owners, developers	Documentation, automation
Collaboration Diagram	Who interacts with whom	Managers, cross-functional teams	Clarifying responsibilities
Choreography Diagram	Order of message exchanges	Contract teams, API designers	Specifying behavior, contracts
Conversation Diagram	Communication topics at a glance	Executives, partners	High-level overview, onboarding

This is how you turn a complex process into a living, multi-view model. Each diagram answers a different question. Together, they form a complete picture.

And yes—this is a real-world end to end BPMN modeling example. I’ve used it in multiple insurance and healthcare clients. It works because it’s not about perfect diagrams. It’s about clear communication.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I model a business process with multiple BPMN diagrams in one tool?

Yes. Tools like Visual Paradigm are designed for multi-diagram modeling. You can create process, collaboration, choreography, and conversation diagrams in the same project, reuse elements, and link them together. This ensures consistency and reduces duplication.

How do I decide which diagram type to use?

Ask: Who is the audience? What question are they trying to answer? If it’s about internal steps, use a process diagram. If it’s about responsibilities, use collaboration. If it’s about message order, use choreography. If it’s about high-level communication, use conversation.

What’s the difference between choreography and collaboration?

Collaboration shows internal processes and message flows between participants. Choreography shows only the message exchanges, without revealing internal steps. Choreography is more formal and contract-oriented.

Do I need all four diagram types for every process?

No. Use only what’s needed. A simple internal process may only need a process diagram. A complex B2B workflow might benefit from all four. Start with the most critical view, then add others as needed.

How do I keep diagrams consistent across views?

Use shared element libraries. Reuse tasks, participants, and interfaces. Link diagrams together. Use a naming convention. Review them together as a team. Visual Paradigm’s repository and traceability features make this much easier.

Is this approach suitable for agile teams?

Yes. In fact, it’s ideal. You can model a process in stages. Start with a process diagram. Add collaboration when partners are involved. Use choreography for API contracts. Keep it lean, keep it clear. This is how agile teams scale process visibility without overhead.

Remember: the goal isn’t to create every diagram type. It’s to choose the right one for the right audience. That’s the power of BPMN multi diagram case study—it teaches you to think in views, not just diagrams.