If a purchase request still relies on someone spotting an email, forwarding it on, then chasing the next approver three days later, the process is not really a process – it is a habit. That is usually the point where businesses start asking how to automate approval workflows, not because automation sounds clever, but because delays, missed steps and weak audit trails are costing time every week.
For most small and mid-sized organisations, approval friction shows up in familiar places: document sign-off, annual leave, expenses, supplier onboarding, policy acknowledgements and simple purchasing. None of these should require a spreadsheet, a chain of emails and a good memory. If you are already using Microsoft 365, you have the foundations to make approvals faster, more consistent and easier to track.
The mistake is assuming the answer is to automate everything at once. It rarely is. Good approval automation starts with choosing the right process, tightening the rules and then building something people will actually use.
How to automate approval workflows without adding complexity
The best approval workflows are usually the least dramatic. A user submits a form, the right person is notified, the decision is recorded, and the next action happens automatically. If the request is rejected, it stops cleanly. If it is approved, the system updates the list, notifies the requester and moves the item to the next stage.
That sounds straightforward, but the quality of the result depends on the decisions made before any workflow is built. If the current process is vague, political or inconsistent, automation will simply make those problems happen faster.
Start by identifying one approval process that is both frequent and painful. It should happen often enough to justify the effort, but not be so complex that it turns into a six-month redesign exercise. Expense approvals, document approvals and basic purchasing are usually good candidates because the rules are visible, the participants are known and the business impact is easy to measure.
Once you have the right target, map the process as it actually works now, not as people claim it works. Who submits the request? Who approves first? Is there a value threshold? What happens if the approver is on leave? Does finance need visibility? Where is the final record stored? Most approval delays come from these grey areas rather than the technology itself.
What a well-designed approval workflow looks like
A useful automated approval workflow does four things well. It captures the request in a structured way, routes it according to clear rules, records every decision and tells the right people what happens next.
In Microsoft 365, that often means combining a SharePoint list or document library with a Power Automate flow and, where needed, a Power Apps form for a cleaner front end. For some businesses, a standard Microsoft approval is enough. For others, especially where governance or document control matters, the process needs stronger structure around metadata, permissions and status tracking.
This is where it pays to be practical. If the approval is simple, keep it simple. A two-stage approval for low-value purchases may be enough. If the process touches compliance, contracts or controlled documents, you will probably need more than a basic approve or reject button. Comments, version history, escalation rules and retention of decision data become much more important.
A common mistake is trying to mirror every exception in the first version. That tends to create workflows that are hard to support and even harder to trust. It is usually better to design for the 80 per cent case first, then deal with edge cases once the core process is working.
The build decisions that matter most
When businesses ask how to automate approval workflows, they often focus on the flow itself. In practice, the surrounding design matters just as much.
First, decide where the data should live. If the process revolves around forms and status updates, a SharePoint list is often the right starting point. If the approval relates to a controlled document, a SharePoint document library makes more sense. The choice affects permissions, reporting and how easy it is to maintain later.
Next, define the routing logic properly. Should approval go to a named individual, a role, a manager from Entra ID, or a shared mailbox? Routing to a role is often more resilient than routing to one person, especially in smaller teams where responsibilities shift. If your process depends on one individual who is on holiday for half of August, the workflow is not your biggest problem.
Then think about exception handling. What happens if no approver is found? What if someone does not respond within two days? What if a request is amended after submission? These are not edge cases. They are normal operating conditions, and they need to be built in from the start.
Finally, decide what success looks like. Faster turnaround is one measure, but it should not be the only one. A good workflow should also reduce chasing, improve visibility, create a reliable audit trail and remove ambiguity about who approved what.
How to automate approval workflows in Microsoft 365
For businesses already paying for Microsoft 365, the obvious advantage is that much of the capability is already there. SharePoint provides the structure, Power Automate handles routing and notifications, and Teams or Outlook can surface approvals where people already work.
That does not mean every workflow should be built the same way. A lightweight holiday request may only need a simple form, one approver and a calendar update. A contract approval may need metadata validation, multiple approval stages, version control and a final move to a controlled repository. The toolset can support both, but the level of design should match the business risk.
This is also where experience matters. Approval workflows often look easy in a demo and awkward in live use. Approvers reply in the wrong place, duplicate requests appear, users bypass the form because email feels quicker, and nobody is clear which status means the item is actually approved. These are solvable problems, but only if the workflow is designed around real user behaviour rather than ideal behaviour.
For that reason, it is worth piloting with one department before wider rollout. Finance, operations or HR often provide a good test bed because they feel the cost of delays quickly and can give useful feedback on where the workflow needs tightening.
Common reasons approval automation fails
The technology is rarely the real issue. More often, failure comes from overcomplicating the process, underdefining the rules or treating the workflow as a one-off build that never needs reviewing.
Another common problem is poor ownership. If nobody owns the approval logic, the workflow drifts out of date as teams change, approvers move roles and policies evolve. Suddenly the automated process is technically running but operationally wrong. That is worse than manual, because people assume the system must be correct.
There is also a trade-off between speed and control. A heavily governed workflow may reduce risk but create friction if too many approvals are stacked in sequence. On the other hand, a stripped-back process may move quickly but leave gaps in accountability. The right design depends on the type of approval, the volume and the consequences of getting it wrong.
This is why sensible automation is usually iterative. Start with a process that has clear value, get adoption, measure the result and improve it. That approach is generally cheaper, quicker and more useful than trying to redesign every approval path in one go.
Where businesses usually see the fastest return
The strongest early wins tend to come from processes that are repetitive, visible and mildly annoying rather than highly strategic. Expense approvals, invoice sign-off, policy acknowledgement and internal document review are all good examples. They consume enough time to matter, but they do not require a large transformation programme to fix.
Once those are working, it becomes much easier to tackle more involved workflows such as procurement, onboarding or cross-department approvals. By then, the business has seen that structured requests, automatic routing and proper status tracking are not a nice extra. They are simply a better way to run everyday operations.
For many SMEs, that is the wider value. Approval automation is not just about shaving a few minutes off admin. It creates consistency. It gives managers visibility. It reduces reliance on whoever happens to know how the process works. And it helps you get more value from Microsoft 365 without adding another system to support.
If you are deciding where to start, pick the approval that causes the most avoidable chasing, not the one with the fanciest logic. The best first workflow is usually the one your team will thank you for next week.