Training Teams to Think in Both Notations

When a team begins to distinguish between predictable workflows and adaptive cases, they’ve crossed a threshold. That moment—when modeling choices start feeling intentional rather than routine—marks the beginning of true process maturity.

For years, I’ve observed teams struggle to shift between BPMN and CMMN not because they lack skill, but because they’re trained to see only one side of business reality. The magic happens not in mastering either notation in isolation, but in learning to think across both.

That’s what this chapter is about: practical, experience-driven methods for teaching teams to think in both BPMN and CMMN. You’ll find structured exercises, real workshop formats, and guidance on how to build teams that see modeling not as a checklist, but as a mindset.

By the end, you’ll be able to run process modeling workshops that don’t just teach notation—but cultivate adaptability, shared understanding, and decision-making confidence.

Why Traditional Training Fails: The Modeling Mindset Gap

Too many training programs treat BPMN and CMMN as separate modules. You learn BPMN, then CMMN, like courses in different languages. But they’re not languages. They’re lenses.

When teams are taught to see only one model type, they begin to force-fit reality into a single structure. A customer complaint that unfolds differently every time gets drawn as a BPMN flowchart with 27 branches—and then abandoned.

True mastery isn’t in knowing symbols. It’s in recognizing patterns: when to follow a path, when to let the worker shape it.

That’s why the best training begins not with diagrams, but with scenarios. Present a case, ask: “How would you model this?” Then guide them to explore both BPMN and CMMN. The contrast reveals insight.

Start with a Shared Context: The Adaptive Incident Example

Use a real-world example: an incident reported via support ticket that may escalate, require investigation, or be resolved quickly.

Show the same scenario through two lenses:

• BPMN: Focus on the defined path—ticket creation → triage → assignment → resolution → closure.
• CMMN: Focus on the case—What tasks are active? What conditions must be true to close? Who decides?

Ask: “Which model better reflects what actually happens?” This isn’t about right or wrong—it’s about fit.

Designing Effective Process Modeling Workshops

Workshops are where theory turns into intuition. The best ones are hands-on, collaborative, and rooted in real business problems.

Here’s a proven 90-minute workshop format I’ve used with analysts, developers, and business leads across three continents.

Step 1: Set the Stage with a Real Business Problem (10 min)

Choose a scenario that challenges assumptions:

“An insurance claim comes in with missing documentation. The adjuster must decide: investigate further, request more info, or close the claim.”

Frame it as a case, not a workflow. Avoid the word “process” at first.

Step 2: Brainstorm the Case (15 min)

Split teams into groups. Give them sticky notes and ask:

• What are the main tasks?
• What milestones define progress?
• When can this case be closed?
• What triggers a shift in direction?

Use CMMN notation: stages, tasks, case files, entry/exit criteria.

Step 3: Re-Model with BPMN (25 min)

Now, ask: “Can we model this as a BPMN flow?”

Guide them to draw the main path—but challenge them:

• How many decision points are in the flow?
• What happens if the adjuster adds new info after a decision?
• How do we handle exceptions that weren’t planned?

They’ll quickly realize that BPMN forces a structure that may not reflect reality.

Step 4: Compare and Reflect (20 min)

Facilitate a group discussion using this checklist:

• Which model captures unpredictability better?
• Which allows for more control by the knowledge worker?
• Which is easier to explain to a business stakeholder?
• When would you use BPMN here? When would CMMN make more sense?

Let the tension emerge. That’s where learning happens.

Step 5: Introduce Hybrid Patterns (20 min)

Now show how they can coexist:

• BPMN for the high-level validation and routing process.
• CMMN for the adaptive investigation subcase.

Use a simple diagram: BPMN subprocess → CMMN case plan.

Explain: “The BPMN controls the *what*—the rules. The CMMN handles the *how*—the flexibility.”

Key Training Principles for Success

Here are the non-negotiables I’ve learned from running dozens of workshops:

1. Start with business context, not notation. People model better when they understand the problem first.
2. Use real examples from the business domain. Avoid generic “customer onboarding” unless it’s actual onboarding.
3. Encourage debate, not just compliance. If everyone draws the same diagram, something’s wrong.
4. Pair modeling with documentation. Every diagram should answer: “Who does what? When? Why?”
5. Reinforce that both are valid. The goal isn’t to favor one over the other—but to choose wisely.

One team I worked with struggled with patient triage in a hospital. They modeled it in BPMN first—only to discover delays due to unanticipated events. When they rebuilt it in CMMN, they saw that 40% of cases never followed the expected path. The model wasn’t wrong—it was incomplete.

That’s the power of learning to think in both.

Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

Even with good training, teams fall into traps. Here’s how to recognize and correct them:

Pitfall	Why It Happens	Fix
Forcing CMMN into BPMN-like flows	Mistaking flexibility for complexity	Ask: “Can this task be completed anytime? Is there a reason it must happen in order?” If not, use CMMN.
Overusing BPMN for ad hoc decisions	Seeking control through structure	Ask: “Would the process fail if we skipped a step?” If no, consider a CMMN case with optional tasks.
Confusing CMMN with a decision table	Not understanding sentries and constraints	Use real-time examples: “The case can’t progress until the doctor signs off.” This is a sentry, not a gate.

These aren’t mistakes—they’re learning moments. Anticipate them, name them, and turn them into teaching tools.

From Training to Transformation: Sustaining the Mindset

One workshop doesn’t make a champion. The real value comes from embedding the mindset across teams.

Here’s how I recommend building lasting impact:

• Run monthly modeling sprints: present a business scenario, run a 60-minute workshop, and document insights.
• Create a shared model repository with annotated examples of BPMN and CMMN in action.
• Include modeling decisions in peer reviews: “Why did you choose CMMN here?”
• Use tools like Visual Paradigm to auto-validate rules—such as detecting unlinked sentries or missing case files.

When teams start discussing notation as a strategic choice, not a technical chore, you’ve succeeded.

Frequently Asked Questions

How do I start teaching BPMN and CMMN to a team with no modeling experience?

Begin with analogies, not diagrams. Use stories like “a doctor diagnosing a patient” to explain CMMN, and “a factory assembly line” for BPMN. Then introduce symbols through real examples.

Run mini-workshops: one hour to draw the process, another to model the case. The contrast teaches more than any lecture.

Can one person be expert in both BPMN and CMMN?

Absolutely. But expertise isn’t memorizing symbols—it’s understanding when to apply each. A practitioner who can assess a scenario and say, “This is adaptive, so CMMN fits,” is already thinking like a hybrid expert.

How many process modeling workshops should we run to build confidence?

Three to five workshops spread over 6–8 weeks are ideal. Each should focus on a different domain: sales, HR, IT, compliance. This builds transferable insight across contexts.

What tools support both BPMN and CMMN training?

Visual Paradigm is excellent. It offers side-by-side comparison, real-time validation, and collaborative editing. You can also simulate both models within one project to test logic and consistency.

How do we measure success in a process modeling workshop?

Success isn’t about perfect diagrams. It’s about better decision-making. Measure by:

• Reduction in model rework after feedback
• Increased clarity in stakeholder discussions
• Ability to justify notation choice in meetings

Is it worth investing in BPMN CMMN training if we primarily use one?

Yes. Even if your core process is BPMN, the ability to model exceptions or knowledge-intensive tasks in CMMN makes your entire system more resilient. Training in both ensures you’re not building brittle models.

Ultimately, the goal isn’t to master both notations—it’s to think in both. That’s the real outcome of every process modeling workshop.

When teams can switch between structured flow and adaptive planning, they stop asking, “Which one should I use?” and start asking, “Which one reflects the reality of this work?”

That’s where true process excellence begins.