Normal Change Flow Migration – Prevent On Hold Logic from Affecting Previous Approval Stages

[Shubhras]

I am currently migrating a Normal Change Workflow to Flow Designer and am facing an issue with handling approvals when the Change is placed On Hold.

Current behavior:

1. In the Assess state, Peer Approval is requested.

2. If the Change is moved to On Hold, the Peer Approval records are updated to No Longer Required.

3. When On Hold is removed, those Peer Approval records are reverted back to Requested.

4. Once Peer Approval is approved, the Change moves to the Authorize state.

5. In the Authorize state, CAB Approval is requested.

6. Similar to Peer Approval, if the Change is moved to On Hold, the CAB Approval records are updated to No Longer Required, and when On Hold is removed, they are reverted back to Requested.

To achieve this, I am using a Do the Following Until State = Authorize loop in the Assess phase.

The issue I am facing is that when the flow enters the Authorize phase and CAB Approvals are generated, the On Hold logic is also affecting the previous Peer Approval records. Those Peer Approvers are being changed back and forth between Requested and No Longer Required, even though they have already completed their approval in the Assess state.

My requirement is:

• Once Peer Approval is completed and the Change moves to Authorize, the previous Peer Approval records should no longer be affected by the On Hold logic.

• When CAB Approval is active, the On Hold processing should only affect the current CAB Approval records and not any approvals that were generated in the Assess phase.

What would be the best approach in Flow Designer to ensure that On Hold handling only impacts the currently active approval stage and does not update approval records from previous stages?

[MURALIR20469232]

Hello @Shubhras ,

Based on the flow image that you have shared, for approval you are using look up record. Because of this, it will get all approval list. Also, Instead of using wait for change request or lookup approval in those places, you can use stage field. So that it won't impact this [If the Change is moved to On Hold, the Peer Approval records are updated to No Longer Required.]. Make the flow in detailed conditional basis so that the points you mentioned will be fixed. Generally, this type of scenarios/use cases related to approval, detailed conditions and utilizing stages/state filed is must.  Flow might be enlarge but the flow execution will work as expected. Also, create separate approval record for separate group.

*************************************************************************************************************
If you found this post helpful, please mark it as “Helpful.”
Feel free to share your insights or suggest corrections to benefit our community.

Regards
Murali.K.V.R

[Shubhras]

Hello @MURALIR20469232 : Ask for approval is in parallel and that is checking condition for on hold to be false first its going for peer review and after that cab group. In look up record i am updating 'no longer required" or "requested" based on approval table members. This is also different for both stages. But when change move to authorize it reinitiates previous approvers also as requested.