I know you’re trying to drive a different point here, but Jan and I actually never suggested that we described “all the BPMN you need”. If you look at our articles and posts you will see that we were very clear about that. All we said was that we documented the current use of BPMN, without a qualitative judgment whether the resulting models were good or bad.

Our intent was to describe actual use (like a language theorist would), not to be prescriptive (like Strunk & White are for English). If you understand how language is acquired you stand a better chance at developing a strategy for teaching the proper use of it. BPMN is being abused and misused in too many places. The vendor community plays a big role in this, because there are very few tools that encourage the proper use of BPMN.

BPMN users need a good style guide, and I for one am very much looking forward to your book.

All the best

Michael

I am teaching BPMN here in Germany for a year now, in open classes as well as inhouse. I know exactly what you mean – In Germany it is somehow even worse, because we have a very traditional BPM-Business-fraction wich is used to Event Driven Process Chains (EPC). They do not want to leave their comfort zone and call BPMN too complicated, not unterstanding that 1) you can customize BPMN by introducing modeling pattern like your 3 levels for EVERY target group and 2) if the world is changing, you just have to learn new stuff if you do not want to be left behind. Tough, but true.

Thanks for your good work in that Too-Much-Technology-Minded OMG group defining BPMN 2.0…

Jakob