Our current approval workflow is expense manager -> expense processor -> expense processor manager.
The expense processor role is assigned to an audit team who checks the receipt and manage company policy compliance. The expense processor manager role is assigned to a tax expert team to audit the tax amount in the expense report.
This process turned out to be a nightmare. Because many tax experts overwrite the audit step by approving the expense report twice. As you know, processor manager role can overwrite processor step. We have found out several violations of the company policy when tax expert did that. For example, a tax expert approves Christmas supplies while it is no not allowed by our expense policy.
What is the best practice to set up the tax review step in the workflow? We don't want the tax experts to overwrite the audit.
Is 2nd approver a better approach? But then we will need to update all employee's profile to have a 2nd approver.
How about authorized approver? Anybody has done that before?
Thanks for posting!
This might be a good question for our User Admin Group as they would have the most experience setting up approval flows. Are you your company's Admin? If so, you should check it out! Our User Admin Group members have access to the peer-to-peer knowledge sharing of the Admin only space.
Hope this helps!
Both options you mentioned would probably be the best way to approach this. I know assigning everyone a second approver or assigning approval limits will be some work, but if you compare this to the "nightmare" that is currenly happening, I think you will agree it was worth the time.
Having two different groups of people with the two different Processor roles, allows for either of these roles to approve the report and process it.
I think if it were me, I would just use the second approver option and not use approval limits. That way you don't have to worry about the default manager having to choose the next approver, it will automatically go to the second assigned approver.