In the current era of digital transformation, traditional business process management (BPM) often lack the flexibility required to manage dynamic and knowledge-intensive business processes. The purpose of this article is to present the possibilities of overcoming the limitations of traditional business process modeling focused on designing and representing the exact process flow by comparing two approaches: the widely adopted Business Process Modeling and Notation (BPMN) and the declarative, rule-based Adaptive Case Management (ACM) approach. Using a Repair Service Management (RSM) case study, we systematically analyze the strengths and limitations of both approaches regarding expressiveness, adaptability, and change management efficiency. While modeling using ad hoc subprocesses in BPMN offers some flexibility in modeling the flow of a business process, the declarative rule-based method empowers business experts to design and maintain business applications with a focus on the purpose and outcome of the business process rather than on designing its exact flow which is important to handle unforeseen situations. Building on these insights, we offer initial advice to help practitioners and researchers decide when to consider each modeling approach in dynamic business environments, contributing to the ongoing development of BPM methodologies that are essential for the digital transformation of companies.