A request may require input from both an operational reviewer and a budget owner. When designing the process in Busabase, how should I distinguish “everyone must approve” from “any one person may approve”? How should I decide whether those reviews belong in parallel or in a fixed sequence?
For a business request that needs more than one person, model who must say yes explicitly on the record (or on child approval rows). Distinguish all must approve from any one may approve, and choose parallel vs sequence based on whether later reviewers need the earlier decision.
*Diagram · all-must vs any-one; parallel vs sequence*
| Rule | How to express it on the request |
|---|---|
| Everyone must approve | Separate fields: opsReview = Approved/Rejected/Pending, budgetReview = … . Overall status becomes Approved only when all required fields are Approved (Formula / Agent / checklist). |
| Any one may approve | One field reviewerDecision plus reviewedBy, or multiple reviewer fields where overall Approved if any required role is Approved (and none Rejected, if that is your rule). |
Avoid a single shared “Status = Approved” that anyone can flip without recording who covered which concern.
Pending review at once; gate final approval on the all/any rule above. Faster when reviews are independent. Awaiting ops → Awaiting budget → Approved. Use when Budget should only review after Ops accepts scope. Busabase Change Requests for documents/schema follow the space’s review policy (commonly a single approval path). That is separate from your Base’s business process. For ops + budget on a request record, use the field/checklist model above (and Agent reminders if you want nudges).
Awaiting ops.If you share whether Budget may run in parallel with Ops, we can suggest the exact status list.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading is always open; you only need an account to post.
Sign in