Workflows really are just chains of job templates, it lets you take work that you might also ordinarily do singularly and build them up into something larger
Because some people don't (always) need workflows? Workflows are built up from job templates themselves. Some folks don't want or need to break plays down into single roles and most of the time those playbooks and templates are useful as standalone components. As an example... we have a smoke test system on AWX/Tower. We already have playbooks/job templates that build images (which we use for the production AWX image publishing process) and provision systems (which we use any time we need a VM provisioned). These are ideal when used in conjunction with a smoke test play (which an engineer might want to run in a standalone fashion). We run these all of the time outside of the Full Smoke Test workflow, in some cases they are themselves collections of roles but they are 3 distinct processes that we happen to want to run together along with some failure handling playbooks that clean up resources.
Your intuition with Inventories is correct... there are a lot of ways to configure and lay it out and it's really up to you the best way to do it for your own situation. I usually counsel people to organize inventories in a way that optimizes your playbook usage. If your teams are always running their own playbooks against their own inventory then by all means, break your inventory down into teams. It's fine to duplicate hosts between inventories, that's a common pattern if there is overlap in a system's responsibility. You'll just need to play with this to see what makes the most sense to you.
For your own sanity, though... don't use submodules.