Our approval process takes longer than delivery. How can governance be proportionate?
Excessive approval overheadMatch approval depth to consequence, reversibility, and delegated authority. Remove redundant reviews while preserving controls that address real risk or obligations.
What to do now
- Map approval steps and waiting time
- Identify what risk each step controls
- Delegate low-risk decisions appropriately
- Measure the revised process and exceptions
When to escalate
Escalate when
A proposed simplification removes a required control or exceeds authority.
Who decides
The sponsor or formally delegated governance body
Example
Low-value routine requests use delegated approval while major baseline changes retain sponsor review.
Mistake to avoid
Deleting all approvals because the current process is slow.
Prevent a repeat
Review overdue decisions and confirm that decision makers have the authority and evidence they need.
Suggested ApprovedFlow setup
- Approvals
- Documents
- Projects
Attach the decision brief and evidence to a configured approval route only after confirming the actual authority and delegation rules. See the platform
Related cases
- A governance committee has no quorum. Can the project continue?Invalid decision process
- The sponsor is unavailable when we need approval. What should we establish?Unavailable decision authority
- Reviews take longer than the work itself. How can we plan better?Unplanned approval lead time
- The project team owns the process, but will leave soon. Who takes over?Missing enduring process ownership