본문으로 건너뛰기

Approval Workflows

How decisions get authorized, who approves what, and escalation mechanisms

개요​

Approval workflows define how Kyndof authorizes decisions and actions, balancing execution speed against appropriate oversight. Well-designed approval workflows prevent both bureaucratic paralysis (requiring approval for trivial choices) and reckless execution (acting without necessary authorization).

Understanding approval workflows helps teams know when to act independently, when to seek approval, and who holds decision authority. This clarity accelerates execution by eliminating ambiguity about decision rights while ensuring appropriate review for consequential choices.

Kyndof's approval workflows integrate tightly with the RABSIC accountability framework. The Accountable party for a decision typically holds approval authority, though high-impact decisions may require additional executive approval regardless of RABSIC assignment.

Approval Categories​

Kyndof categorizes approvals based on impact, reversibility, and scope:

No Approval Required​

Actions teams can take autonomously without seeking permission. This category includes most day-to-day work: tactical execution decisions, minor code changes, routine communications, standard process execution, and resource use within allocated budgets.

Expanding the no-approval category accelerates execution by reducing coordination overhead. Teams closest to work make better tactical decisions faster than distant approvers.

Role-Based Approval​

Decisions requiring approval from a specific organizational role defined by the RABSIC matrix. Most Kyndof approvals fall here: project scope changes need approval from the project's Accountable party, department budget use needs department head approval, technical architecture needs CTO approval.

Role-based approval scales well because authority is distributed to appropriate levels rather than bottlenecked at executive leadership.

Executive Approval​

High-impact decisions requiring explicit executive sign-off regardless of RABSIC assignment: strategic direction changes, major resource commitments, policy changes affecting the entire organization, external partnerships, and risk acceptance beyond normal tolerances.

Executive approval applies when decisions have company-wide implications or commit resources beyond individual domains.

Board Approval​

Rare decisions requiring board authorization: fundamental business model changes, major acquisition or funding, CEO succession, or commitments exceeding executive authority limits as defined in company bylaws.

Board approval frequency signals organizational maturity—startups rarely need it; established companies have clearer boundaries.

Standard Approval Workflows​

Common approval patterns at Kyndof:

Project Initiation​

Trigger: Team proposes new project Approver: Department head (role-based) for departmental projects; CTO for technical platform projects; CEO for strategic initiatives Criteria: Strategic alignment, resource availability, expected ROI, risk assessment Timeline: 3-5 business days Escalation: If department head denies but team believes project is strategically important

Projects can't start execution without explicit approval, but ideation and planning activities don't require approval.

Budget Expenditure​

Trigger: Spending organizational funds Approval Tiers:

  • Under $1,000: Team lead approval
  • $1,000-$10,000: Department head approval
  • $10,000-$50,000: CTO approval
  • Over $50,000: CEO approval

Timeline: Same-day for routine purchases; 2-3 days for large expenditures Documentation: Expense justification, expected business value, alternative cost comparison

Budget approvals balance spending authority with financial control. Thresholds adjust based on organizational size and budget scale.

Technical Architecture Changes​

Trigger: Proposing new technology, framework change, or architectural pattern Approver: CTO (Accountable party for technical decisions) Criteria: Alignment with technical strategy, operational impact, team capability, technical debt implications Timeline: 1 week for analysis and review Documentation: Architecture Decision Record with context, decision, consequences, alternatives

Architecture decisions receive careful scrutiny because they accumulate into long-term platform quality.

Hiring Decisions​

Trigger: Opening new position or extending offer to candidate Position Opening Approval: Department head proposes; CEO approves based on budget and organizational plan Offer Approval: Department head recommends; CEO approves compensation and terms Timeline: Position approval within 3 days; offer approval within 24 hours Criteria: Business need, budget availability, market compensation benchmarks, culture fit

Hiring approvals balance team autonomy in candidate selection with executive oversight of organizational growth.

External Communications​

Trigger: Public statements, blog posts, press releases, partnership announcements Approver: CEO for company-wide announcements; department heads for domain-specific communications Timeline: 2-3 days for review and approval Criteria: Message accuracy, strategic alignment, risk assessment, brand consistency

External communication approval prevents misaligned messages and reputational risk.

Policy Changes​

Trigger: Modifying organizational policies or processes Approver: Policy owner (varies by policy type) for minor changes; executive team for major changes Timeline: 1-2 weeks including stakeholder consultation Criteria: Problem being solved, stakeholder impact, implementation feasibility, consistency with organizational values Process: Consultation with affected parties before approval decision

Policy changes receive thorough review because they affect behavioral expectations and organizational culture.

Approval Request Best Practices​

Effective approval requests increase approval speed and quality:

Provide Context​

Explain why the decision matters, what problem it solves, and why it needs approval now. Context helps approvers understand significance and urgency without extensive back-and-forth.

Requests without context create approval delays while approvers gather background.

Present Options​

Show that you've considered alternatives. Present the recommended approach alongside 1-2 alternatives with pros/cons analysis. This demonstrates thorough thinking and makes it easier for approvers to provide informed input.

Single-option requests suggest predetermined conclusions rather than genuine decision-making.

Quantify Impact​

Use concrete numbers where possible: cost, timeline, affected users, expected return, resource requirements. Quantification helps approvers assess tradeoffs and prioritize competing requests.

Vague impact descriptions ("significant improvement") provide insufficient basis for informed approval.

Specify Timeline​

Clearly state when you need the decision and why that timing matters. Different approvals have different urgency—help approvers prioritize appropriately.

Identify Risks​

Acknowledge downsides, risks, and uncertainties. Honest risk disclosure builds approver confidence and prevents unpleasant surprises.

Requests that ignore obvious risks signal inadequate analysis.

Recommend Action​

State your recommendation explicitly. Approvers appreciate clear recommendations from subject matter experts rather than passive "here are some options" presentations.

Approval Response Types​

Approvers can respond in several ways beyond simple yes/no:

Approved​

Full authorization to proceed as requested. Approval may include conditions, guidance, or constraints that must be honored.

Approved with Modifications​

Authorization to proceed with specified changes: reduced scope, different timeline, adjusted budget, or alternative approach. Modified approvals require proposer acknowledgment before proceeding.

Deferred​

Decision delayed pending additional information, changed circumstances, or timing considerations. Deferred approvals should specify what's needed to reconsider.

Denied​

Authorization refused with rationale. Denials should explain reasoning and potentially suggest alternative approaches.

Escalated​

Approver determines decision exceeds their authority and escalates to higher level. Escalation should preserve context and analysis from original request.

Approval Timelines and SLAs​

Approval requests include expected response timelines:

Standard Timeline​

Most approvals: 3-5 business days from submission to decision. This allows approvers time for consideration while preventing indefinite delays.

Expedited Timeline​

Urgent approvals: 24-48 hours. Expedited requests clearly state urgency rationale. Overusing expedited requests degrades their effectiveness.

Extended Timeline​

Complex approvals requiring extensive analysis, stakeholder consultation, or board involvement: 2-3 weeks. Extended timeline set during approval request submission.

Timeout Behavior​

If approver doesn't respond within timeline:

  • First timeout (24 hours past SLA): Automated reminder sent
  • Second timeout (48 hours past SLA): Escalates to approver's manager
  • Third timeout (72 hours past SLA): Escalates to next approval level per escalation path

Timeout escalation prevents approval requests from stalling indefinitely while respecting approver authority.

Delegated Approval Authority​

Approvers can delegate authority temporarily:

Temporary Delegation​

When primary approver is unavailable (vacation, leave, travel), they designate a temporary delegate with equivalent approval authority for specified duration.

Temporary delegation enables continued operation without approval bottlenecks during absences.

Standing Delegation​

Permanent authorization for specific approval types to be handled by a delegate. Example: CTO delegates routine technical infrastructure approvals under $5,000 to Senior Engineer.

Standing delegation distributes approval load while maintaining oversight for significant decisions.

Delegation Documentation​

All delegation (temporary and standing) gets documented in Kyndof's approval system. Requestors know who currently holds approval authority; auditors can track delegation patterns.

Approval Audit Trail​

Kyndof maintains comprehensive records of all approval requests and decisions:

Approval Records Include​

  • Request details: what was requested, when, by whom
  • Decision: approved/denied/deferred/modified
  • Approver: who made the decision
  • Rationale: documented reasoning
  • Timestamp: when decision was made
  • Conditions: any constraints or modifications
  • Escalations: if escalation occurred, complete chain

Audit Trail Uses​

Approval history enables pattern analysis: approval velocity trends, common denial reasons, delegation patterns, approver responsiveness, and decision consistency. The Analyst agent performs quarterly approval process reviews identifying bottlenecks and improvement opportunities.

Audit trails also provide accountability and compliance documentation when needed.

Special Approval Scenarios​

Some situations require modified approval approaches:

Emergency Approvals​

When urgent situations require immediate action without time for standard approval processes, Kyndof permits "act now, approve later" with these constraints:

  • Action must address genuine emergency (system outage, security incident, legal deadline)
  • Actor notifies approver immediately upon action
  • Full approval request submitted within 24 hours after action
  • Retroactive approval confirms action was appropriate

Emergency approval abuse results in tighter approval controls, so teams use this sparingly.

Committee Approvals​

Some decisions benefit from collective deliberation: compensation committee for executive pay, architecture review board for major technical changes, or investment committee for capital allocation.

Committee approvals involve 3-5 people with quorum requirements and voting protocols. Committees meet on regular schedules; urgent requests can trigger special sessions.

Conditional Pre-Approval​

Approvers can pre-authorize decisions contingent on specific conditions: "Approved if cost stays under $X" or "Approved contingent on legal review."

Conditional pre-approval accelerates execution by removing approval from the critical path when conditions are met.

Cross-Functional Approval Coordination​

Some decisions require approval from multiple parties:

Sequential Approval​

Approvals that must happen in order: technical feasibility approval before business approval, or legal review before executive approval.

Sequential approval chains can create delays; minimize chain length where possible.

Parallel Approval​

Multiple approvers who can review simultaneously: department heads approving resource sharing, or stakeholders approving cross-functional projects.

Parallel approval reduces timeline but requires coordination to ensure all approvers respond.

Consensus Approval​

Rare cases requiring agreement from all approvers rather than simple majority. Consensus approval is difficult and slow; use only when necessary.

Veto Rights​

Some stakeholders hold veto authority: legal can veto decisions with unacceptable risk exposure; security can veto decisions creating security vulnerabilities.

Veto rights are powerful but limited in scope to specific risk domains.

Approval Process Improvement​

Kyndof continuously refines approval workflows:

Bottleneck Analysis​

Quarterly review of approval timelines identifying consistent delays. Bottlenecks trigger process changes: adjusted thresholds, additional delegates, faster review processes, or clearer criteria.

Authority Distribution​

Regular assessment of whether approval authority sits at the right level. Push approval down when lower-level approvers demonstrate good judgment; pull approval up when decisions consistently exceed expected scope.

Criteria Clarity​

Evolve approval criteria based on decision patterns. If approvers repeatedly request the same information, add it to standard request templates. If certain decision types consistently get approved, consider eliminating approval requirement.

Automation Opportunities​

Some approvals lend themselves to automation: budget approvals within pre-authorized ranges, technical approvals meeting established architecture patterns, or routine contract renewals.

Automation reduces overhead while maintaining appropriate control.

관련 문서​