Approval Workflow

An approval workflow defines who can approve design system changes and what criteria must be met before approval. Effective approval workflows maintain quality standards while enabling efficient contribution and system evolution.

What Is an Approval Workflow

An approval workflow is the structured process through which changes receive authorization to proceed. Workflows specify who has approval authority, what requirements must be satisfied, and how approvals coordinate across different concerns like design, engineering, and accessibility.

Approval workflows serve as quality gates, ensuring changes meet standards before impacting the system. They also establish accountability by making approval authority explicit and creating records of who authorized what changes.

How Approval Workflows Work

Approval authority assignment defines who can approve different change types. Some organizations designate specific individuals as approvers. Others define roles or criteria that confer approval authority. Clear authority prevents both bottlenecks from too few approvers and inconsistency from too many.

Approval requirements specify what must be true before approval can occur. Requirements typically include passing automated checks, completed documentation, design approval for visual changes, and accessibility verification. Requirements ensure consistent evaluation regardless of who approves.

Multi-stage approvals coordinate different concerns. Design approval might precede code approval. Accessibility sign-off might be required alongside engineering approval. Multi-stage workflows ensure all relevant concerns receive attention without requiring any single approver to evaluate everything.

Approval documentation records who approved what and when. This documentation enables accountability, supports auditing, and helps understand decisions after the fact. Automated systems typically capture approval records as part of the contribution workflow.

Key Considerations

• Approval authority should match expertise and capacity to avoid bottlenecks
• Clear requirements enable contributors to prepare approvable submissions
• Multi-stage workflows should coordinate efficiently to avoid unnecessary delays
• Documentation should be automatic rather than requiring manual record-keeping
• Escalation paths should exist for disputed or delayed approvals

Common Questions

How many approvals should be required?

Approval count should balance thoroughness with efficiency. Low-risk changes may need single approval. High-impact changes benefit from multiple perspectives. Organizations should calibrate approval requirements to change risk and organizational risk tolerance. Excessive approval requirements slow velocity; insufficient requirements allow quality problems.

How do organizations handle approval delays?

Approval delays often indicate capacity problems or unclear ownership. Solutions include expanding approver pools, establishing response time expectations, implementing escalation procedures for delayed approvals, and tracking approval metrics to identify systemic issues. Persistent delays damage contributor experience and slow system evolution.

What happens when approvers disagree?

Disagreement resolution mechanisms prevent deadlock when approvers have conflicting views. Designated decision-makers can break ties. Escalation to governance bodies provides resolution paths. Documented criteria help reduce subjective disagreement. Organizations should establish resolution procedures before disagreements arise.

Summary

Approval workflows govern change authorization through structured review and clear decision authority. Success requires appropriate authority assignment, clear requirements, and efficient coordination across concerns. Organizations should design approval workflows that maintain quality while enabling productive contribution.