{"items":[{"id":"i-_ywKPIII_V","type":"row","href":"https://coda.io/apis/v1/docs/HVHIRo7NDD/tables/grid--5n4fdktB7/rows/i-_ywKPIII_V","name":"Manual vs Digital Approval Workflow","index":1,"createdAt":"2022-07-25T07:55:25.135Z","updatedAt":"2022-07-25T08:09:32.766Z","browserLink":"https://coda.io/d/_dHVHIRo7NDD#_tugrid--5n4fdktB7/_rui-_ywKPIII_V","values":{"title":"Manual vs Digital Approval Workflow","description":"Understand the benefits of digitlizing your approval workflow","createdAt":"25/07/2022 04:00PM","readTime":"4 min read","authorName":"Christopher","authorImgUrl":"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Sample_User_Icon.png","Content":"One of the most frequent complaints by employees of companies who have implemented approval workflows today is the enormous amount of paperwork that comes with it. From preparing the submission documents, deciding the list of approvers, following up with individual approvers and documenting their approvals for audit trail purposes, these time-consuming tasks are just never-ending. This is notwithstanding the possible scenario of approvers requesting some amendments to be made, making it a nightmare to perform a proper version control of the documents.\n‍\n\nSeriously, how does one even decide the version number in the first place?\n‍\nTaking a Look at Manual vs Digital Approval Workflow\nLet's take a look at the happy flow where the requestor submits a proposal in a basic level up approval workflow (Click here to read more about the different types of approval workflow). First of all, the requestor probably has to fill up a template document mandated by that specific process and attach relevant supporting documents. Then, the requestor would send out an email to the list of designated approvers and cross his fingers hoping that the approver would not overlook the email. It is a known fact that it is likely that there would be some dedicated requestors who took the extra mile to inform their approvers that the request has been submitted and is pending their approval, but is it a fair expectation from all requestors? After all, nobody enjoys providing the service of a \"human reminder\" (unless they are paid highly to do so). Furthermore, imagine repeating this entire cycle Nth times in cases where there is more than 1 approver! \n\n‍\nFortunately, we are in the digital era where there are many cloud software available at low costs that may help you to streamline the workflow. Upon confirming the design of the new workflow and inputting it into their system, all the requestor needs to do is to just submit the request according to the template. Modern workflow systems would be able to configure the set of approvals automatically based on the request and the requestor's reporting line while providing the requestor the flexibility to add additional approvers to approve concurrently or in a fixed sequence. In addition, these modern workflow cloud systems also have reminder features built-in where reminders would be auto-generated in the event the approver did not respond to the request within a pre-defined time.\nWhat happens if there are changes/amendments from the approvers?\nGiven that processes are usually set up with the objective of having proper control and governance in mind, it is common that the approvers who were given the mandate to execute their responsibilities to perform a thorough review of the request. In some cases, approvers have the right not to approve a request if they deem the request lacks certain critical information. As different approvers will assess the request from different perspectives, it is usually a nightmare to ensure that everyone is seeing the same version of the document at any point of time. Without a proper system, it is a never-ending cycle of making amendments to the documents and repetitively sending out the requests until every stakeholder is satisfied.\n‍\n\n‍\nBy leveraging on modern cloud workflow technology, it will help to solve the issues above while laying out a clear and transparent audit trail for everyone to view the progress of the request. In addition, laying out the entire process workflow within a system would be able to generate additional company insights for process improvement such as identifying any process bottlenecks, number of requests triggered per workflow, overall time taken to complete a request etc. Thus, completing the feedback loop for your process improvement team to further optimise the workflows in the company further which would subsequently translate to better efficiency and higher staff satisfaction.\nIf you can't measure it, you can't improve it.\nIf you are still using physical forms or e-mail approvals, there is no time like now to consider revamping these legacy processes. Feel free to reach out to our team here to arrange a FREE consultation to assess your processes and see how we could help to further simplify your processes further. We look forward to hearing from you!","imgUrl":"https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1_IIJ1ud3rq-DwDDbXzaPX5tb4dGkfhTu","tags":"Process","htmlraw":"

One of the most frequent complaints by employees of companies who have implemented approval workflows today is the enormous amount of paperwork that comes with it. From preparing the submission documents, deciding the list of approvers, following up with individual approvers and documenting their approvals for audit trail purposes, these time-consuming tasks are just never-ending. This is notwithstanding the possible scenario of approvers requesting some amendments to be made, making it a nightmare to perform a proper version control of the documents.

‍

$\"image.png\"$

Seriously, how does one even decide the version number in the first place?

‍

Taking a Look at Manual vs Digital Approval Workflow

Let's take a look at the happy flow where the requestor submits a proposal in a basic level up approval workflow (Click here to read more about the different types of approval workflow). First of all, the requestor probably has to fill up a template document mandated by that specific process and attach relevant supporting documents. Then, the requestor would send out an email to the list of designated approvers and cross his fingers hoping that the approver would not overlook the email. It is a known fact that it is likely that there would be some dedicated requestors who took the extra mile to inform their approvers that the request has been submitted and is pending their approval, but is it a fair expectation from all requestors? After all, nobody enjoys providing the service of a \"human reminder\" (unless they are paid highly to do so). Furthermore, imagine repeating this entire cycle Nth times in cases where there is more than 1 approver!

$\"image.png\"$

‍

Fortunately, we are in the digital era where there are many cloud software available at low costs that may help you to streamline the workflow. Upon confirming the design of the new workflow and inputting it into their system, all the requestor needs to do is to just submit the request according to the template. Modern workflow systems would be able to configure the set of approvals automatically based on the request and the requestor's reporting line while providing the requestor the flexibility to add additional approvers to approve concurrently or in a fixed sequence. In addition, these modern workflow cloud systems also have reminder features built-in where reminders would be auto-generated in the event the approver did not respond to the request within a pre-defined time.

What happens if there are changes/amendments from the approvers?

Given that processes are usually set up with the objective of having proper control and governance in mind, it is common that the approvers who were given the mandate to execute their responsibilities to perform a thorough review of the request. In some cases, approvers have the right not to approve a request if they deem the request lacks certain critical information. As different approvers will assess the request from different perspectives, it is usually a nightmare to ensure that everyone is seeing the same version of the document at any point of time. Without a proper system, it is a never-ending cycle of making amendments to the documents and repetitively sending out the requests until every stakeholder is satisfied.

‍

$\"image.png\"$

‍

By leveraging on modern cloud workflow technology, it will help to solve the issues above while laying out a clear and transparent audit trail for everyone to view the progress of the request. In addition, laying out the entire process workflow within a system would be able to generate additional company insights for process improvement such as identifying any process bottlenecks, number of requests triggered per workflow, overall time taken to complete a request etc. Thus, completing the feedback loop for your process improvement team to further optimise the workflows in the company further which would subsequently translate to better efficiency and higher staff satisfaction.

If you can't measure it, you can't improve it.

If you are still using physical forms or e-mail approvals, there is no time like now to consider revamping these legacy processes. Feel free to reach out to our team here to arrange a FREE consultation to assess your processes and see how we could help to further simplify your processes further. We look forward to hearing from you!

"}},{"id":"i-j5LDYTdJPI","type":"row","href":"https://coda.io/apis/v1/docs/HVHIRo7NDD/tables/grid--5n4fdktB7/rows/i-j5LDYTdJPI","name":"Are You Using the Right Type of Approval Workflow for Your Processes?","index":0,"createdAt":"2022-07-20T04:10:48.796Z","updatedAt":"2022-07-26T05:28:29.302Z","browserLink":"https://coda.io/d/_dHVHIRo7NDD#_tugrid--5n4fdktB7/_rui-j5LDYTdJPI","values":{"title":"Are You Using the Right Type of Approval Workflow for Your Processes?","description":"Explore the distinctions between the various approval workflows to improve productivity, consistency & efficiency.","createdAt":"20/07/2022 05:26PM","readTime":"3 min read","authorName":"Christopher","authorImgUrl":"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Sample_User_Icon.png","Content":"Companies are made up of a variety of processes that range in complexity. Regardless of the differences in the details of these processes, they all have one thing in common: work must be approved by at least one or more individuals before it can begin or progress to the next step. Approval procedures are defined within corporations to dictate how submitted work should be approved and denied in order to scale a company while maintaining adequate governance. However, not all approval processes are created equal. Selecting the incorrect workflow, which has not been established and optimised for the purpose, will result in a delayed procedure, which will still result in diminished productivity, consistency, and efficiency.\nLet's look at the distinctions between the various approval workflows:\n‍\n1) Level Up Approval Workflow\nEach step in a simple workflow is accomplished by a single person in a specified order until everyone involved has given their approval. It's crucial to decide who approves the documents first in circumstances where there are numerous levels of review. To be authorised in this approval workflow, all assigned approvers must agree, however any approver might reject the entire request. This workflow is highly recommended for cases where the approvers and the requestor are in the same reporting line and the request is simple.\nAdvantages\nEasy to execute\nSimple to follow up\nApplicable for most small request\nDisadvantages\nIn the event where there are multiple levels of approval are required, the approval process has to begin from the bottom level again if someone further up on the level rejects the request.\nFor every single layer added, the workflow takes longer to complete.\nIn cases where the approval chain is long, the person further on top of the approval chain may not check the details of the request and approve based on the assumption that the previous level below has gone through the details.\nUse Cases\nEmployee leave application\nReimbursement / Small claims\nLearning & development arrangement\n‍\nAs a company grows in size, more complex workflows that demand numerous people's participation become more typical. To fulfil their tasks, each member inside the bigger workflow will use their own procedure. The tasks are put together to form a workflow.\n‍\n2) Parallel Approval Flow\nAn approval flow where the request must be approved by all assigned approvers but the sequence does not matter. This is useful for cases where the request has to be evaluated from multiple departments which evaluate the request from different angles or for cases where the requestor has a matrix reporting line.\nAdvantages\nPromotes transparency and collaboration across different departments\nBetter control and governance as it ensures every aspect of the request is being covered\nAlign interests of multiple stakeholders to a common objective\nDisadvantages\nEither approver could decline the request without the other's input which results in the request being rejected\nIn the event of conflicting interests, approvers may take a longer time to discuss and come to consensus\nA delay from any party who is not available may result in the entire request being delayed, making it unsuitable for time-sensitive requests\nUse Cases\nProject Charter\nRisk and Control Assessment\nTender Evaluation\n‍\n3) User Group Approval Workflow\nAn approval flow in which the case is approved by a group of users from a pre-defined user group. This is effective in high-volume, dedicated workflows where a request could be readily taken up and processed by any member of the same functional job, such as HR, Finance, or Procurement. In some circumstances, especially when the request requires precision, the organisation could incorporate a maker-checker function, which requires another user from the same user group to examine the request. For more complex jobs, the approval procedure may be split down even more internally into a succession of smaller tasks that could be assessed individually by specific users, akin to an assembly line in a factory.\nAdvantages\nFast turn-around time\nAble to support high volume\nEasy to train new staff for the role\nDisadvantages\nLow flexibility\nHigh cost\nBreakdown if there is a request which does not meet any of the pre-specified approval conditions\nUse Cases\nCustomer Service\nHR Helpdesk\nInvoice Processing\n‍\n4) Hybrid Approval Workflow\nThis workflow is the most complex compared to the other workflows tabled above, however, their flexibility provides tremendous value that is worth the time to design such processes. They are commonly used in cases where reviews are conducted internally before extending to external stakeholders for their approval.\nAdvantages\nHigh flexibility to accommodate to almost any request\nAlign internal stakeholder's interests before reaching out to external stakeholders\nDisadvantages\nComplex to design the approval sequence and matrix\nTime-consuming to gather everyone's approval\nUse Case\nChange Management\nUser Access Matrix\nEmployee Resignation\n‍\nIn a nutshell, processes are formalised using approval workflows, which clearly define actors and the tasks they must fulfil. Employees and executives may operate more confidently and efficiently if they have this clarity. You can swiftly examine each delivery and get approvals if you have the correct approval processes in place. The type of approval procedure you develop will be determined by the deliverables and departments with whom you are working.\n","imgUrl":"https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=12eVjgKfTcgFmgzA3ay4FR9exJ9o_7B4F","tags":"Process","htmlraw":"

Companies are made up of a variety of processes that range in complexity. Regardless of the differences in the details of these processes, they all have one thing in common: work must be approved by at least one or more individuals before it can begin or progress to the next step. Approval procedures are defined within corporations to dictate how submitted work should be approved and denied in order to scale a company while maintaining adequate governance. However, not all approval processes are created equal. Selecting the incorrect workflow, which has not been established and optimised for the purpose, will result in a delayed procedure, which will still result in diminished productivity, consistency, and efficiency.

Let's look at the distinctions between the various approval workflows:

‍

1) Level Up Approval Workflow

Each step in a simple workflow is accomplished by a single person in a specified order until everyone involved has given their approval. It's crucial to decide who approves the documents first in circumstances where there are numerous levels of review. To be authorised in this approval workflow, all assigned approvers must agree, however any approver might reject the entire request. This workflow is highly recommended for cases where the approvers and the requestor are in the same reporting line and the request is simple.

Advantages

Easy to execute
Simple to follow up
Applicable for most small request

Disadvantages

In the event where there are multiple levels of approval are required, the approval process has to begin from the bottom level again if someone further up on the level rejects the request.
For every single layer added, the workflow takes longer to complete.
In cases where the approval chain is long, the person further on top of the approval chain may not check the details of the request and approve based on the assumption that the previous level below has gone through the details.

Use Cases

Employee leave application
Reimbursement / Small claims
Learning & development arrangement

‍

As a company grows in size, more complex workflows that demand numerous people's participation become more typical. To fulfil their tasks, each member inside the bigger workflow will use their own procedure. The tasks are put together to form a workflow.

‍

2) Parallel Approval Flow

An approval flow where the request must be approved by all assigned approvers but the sequence does not matter. This is useful for cases where the request has to be evaluated from multiple departments which evaluate the request from different angles or for cases where the requestor has a matrix reporting line.

Advantages

Promotes transparency and collaboration across different departments
Better control and governance as it ensures every aspect of the request is being covered
Align interests of multiple stakeholders to a common objective

Disadvantages

Either approver could decline the request without the other's input which results in the request being rejected
In the event of conflicting interests, approvers may take a longer time to discuss and come to consensus
A delay from any party who is not available may result in the entire request being delayed, making it unsuitable for time-sensitive requests

Use Cases

Project Charter
Risk and Control Assessment
Tender Evaluation

‍

3) User Group Approval Workflow

An approval flow in which the case is approved by a group of users from a pre-defined user group. This is effective in high-volume, dedicated workflows where a request could be readily taken up and processed by any member of the same functional job, such as HR, Finance, or Procurement. In some circumstances, especially when the request requires precision, the organisation could incorporate a maker-checker function, which requires another user from the same user group to examine the request. For more complex jobs, the approval procedure may be split down even more internally into a succession of smaller tasks that could be assessed individually by specific users, akin to an assembly line in a factory.

Advantages

Fast turn-around time
Able to support high volume
Easy to train new staff for the role

Disadvantages

Low flexibility
High cost
Breakdown if there is a request which does not meet any of the pre-specified approval conditions

Use Cases

Customer Service
HR Helpdesk
Invoice Processing

‍

4) Hybrid Approval Workflow

This workflow is the most complex compared to the other workflows tabled above, however, their flexibility provides tremendous value that is worth the time to design such processes. They are commonly used in cases where reviews are conducted internally before extending to external stakeholders for their approval.

Advantages

High flexibility to accommodate to almost any request
Align internal stakeholder's interests before reaching out to external stakeholders

Disadvantages

Complex to design the approval sequence and matrix
Time-consuming to gather everyone's approval

Use Case

Change Management
User Access Matrix
Employee Resignation

‍

In a nutshell, processes are formalised using approval workflows, which clearly define actors and the tasks they must fulfil. Employees and executives may operate more confidently and efficiently if they have this clarity. You can swiftly examine each delivery and get approvals if you have the correct approval processes in place. The type of approval procedure you develop will be determined by the deliverables and departments with whom you are working.

"}}],"href":"https://coda.io/apis/v1/docs/HVHIRo7NDD/tables/grid--5n4fdktB7/rows?pageToken=eyJsaW1pdCI6MjAwLCJvZmZzZXQiOjAsIm9wVmVyc2lvbiI6MTU1OSwic2NoZW1hVmVyc2lvbiI6MTY5LCJzb3J0QnkiOiJjcmVhdGVkQXQiLCJ1c2VDb2x1bW5OYW1lcyI6dHJ1ZX0","nextSyncToken":"eyJsaW1pdCI6MjAwLCJvZmZzZXQiOjAsInNvcnRCeSI6ImNyZWF0ZWRBdCIsInN0YXJ0QXQiOjE2NTg3MzU3MjUuMTM1LCJ1c2VDb2x1bW5OYW1lcyI6dHJ1ZX0"}

Our Insights