Approvals exist to protect money, quality or risk. In practice they are often the slowest part of a process, because nobody is sure who should approve, by when, or what happens if they are away. Four design choices fix most of this.
1. Name a role, not a person
Route the approval to a role ("operations lead") with a named primary and a named backup. When someone is on leave, the request goes to the backup automatically instead of waiting.
2. Use thresholds so small items skip the queue
Not everything needs the same level of review. A simple threshold — below a set amount, or from a pre-approved list — lets routine requests proceed with a log entry instead of an approval. Reviewers then spend their attention on the requests that matter.
3. Give every approval a deadline and a reminder
Decide a reasonable response time and say it in the request. Send one reminder before the deadline and escalate to the backup after it. Reminders should be specific: what is waiting, since when, and the single action needed.
4. Make the request complete before it reaches the approver
Many approvals stall because the approver has to ask for missing details. A short required-fields form — amount, reason, supporting document — means the approver can decide in one look.
Where automation helps
Once the rules above are agreed, automation is straightforward: route by threshold, notify the right role, send the reminder, escalate on the deadline and record the decision. The decision itself stays with a person. Automating the routing without first agreeing thresholds and owners only makes requests stall faster.
Key takeaways
- Primary and backup approvers prevent leave-related stalls.
- Thresholds keep routine items out of the queue.
- Automate routing and reminders; keep the decision human.
