A kitchen underpinned by the Internet of Things (IoT) requires the management of complex procedural processes. This is due to the fact that when supporting an end-user in the preparation of even only one dish, various devices may need to coordinate with each other. Additionally, it is challenging— yet desirable—to enable an end-user to program their kitchen devices according to their preferred behaviour and to allow them to visualise and track their cooking workflows. In this paper, we compared two semantic representations, namely, Behaviour Trees and the DX-MAN model. We analysed these representations based on their suitability for a range of end-users (i.e., novice to experienced). The methodology required the analysis of smart kitchen user requirements, from which we inferred that the main architectural requirements for IoT cooking workflows are variability and compositionality. Guided by the user requirements, we examined various scenarios and analysed workflow complexity and feasibility for each representation. On the one hand, we found that execution complexity tends to be higher on Behaviour Trees. However, due to their fallback node, they provide more transparency on how to recover from unprecedented circumstances. On the other hand, parameter complexity tends to be somewhat higher for the DX-MAN model. Nevertheless, the DX-MAN model can be favourable due to its compositionality aspect and the ease of visualisation it can offer.