Organizations employ Business Process Management (BPM) to respond to ever-increasing demands, such as higher quality expectations in a saturated buyer’s market. Business process modeling represents a key instrument to understand the interplay of activities for meeting customer needs. Typically, corresponding modeling languages, such as the Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), focus on structured business processes whose possible execution flows can be entirely predefined. However, merely managing employees’ adherence to predefined processes is insufficient in the context of rapid developments accelerated by advancing globalization. Rather, the knowledge and experience of process participants play a crucial role in the competitive market environment. Accordingly, modeling languages such as fragment-based Case Management (fCM) have emerged to represent knowledge-intensive processes (KiPs). KiPs allow participants to drive process execution flexibly based on their expertise. BPM methods require precisely elicited business process models. Since individuals often lack comprehensive knowledge of the entire process and interview-based elicitation methods present various limitations, collaborative modeling has become a relevant research area. Such collaborative settings impose significant cognitive demands on participants due to the necessary communication for establishing a shared understanding of the considered KiP. Simultaneously, modeling KiPs is more cognitively demanding than modeling structured processes. This master’s thesis develops a framework of technical and organizational measures to support collaborative fCM modeling. Based on prior studies, this thesis defines and operationalizes role-playing modeling session experiments. The qualitative inquiry of two such intervention-free experiments reveals deficiencies in intuitively approached fCM modeling sessions. Subsequently, the framework development addresses these deficiencies by structuring the modeling process and designing a tangible toolkit. The qualitative evaluation of the developed framework includes two additional role-playing experiments, incorporating the framework as an intervention. The results suggest that the developed framework mitigates all identified deficiencies. Specifically, it enhances participants’ focus on creating and modeling a shared understanding. Simultaneously, the framework promotes active and equitable contributions from all participants, ensuring predictable outcomes and reducing the risk of bias from dominant participants.