Sequential vs. parallel approvals: which workflow should you use?

Sequential approvals send a request to reviewers one after another. Parallel approvals send the same review stage to several people at the same time. Choose sequential routing when a later decision depends on an earlier one. Choose parallel routing when reviewers can assess the same version independently.

That dependency test matters more than speed. A parallel route can create rework when one reviewer changes the request while others review it. A sequential route can add days of waiting when each specialist could have acted independently.

Source review: August 9, 2026. The examples in this guide illustrate workflow design. Your finance, legal, compliance, security, and operational leaders should set the authority and completion rules for your organization.

Sequential and parallel approvals work differently

In a sequential approval workflow, each stage waits for the required outcome from the stage before it. A finance director may review a purchase only after the budget owner confirms the business need.

In a parallel approval workflow, multiple reviewers receive work at the same stage. Legal, security, and privacy teams can review one software request independently, then the workflow joins their decisions before it continues.

Official Salesforce approval guidance uses the same distinction: serial steps start in order, while parallel steps can begin together. Microsoft’s approval documentation adds a second design choice inside a parallel stage: whether everyone must approve or the first response completes the stage.

Use four questions to choose the route

Do not ask which route looks faster in a diagram. Ask how the decisions depend on one another.

This method often produces a hybrid route. That is a useful result, not a design failure. Most enterprise decisions contain both independent reviews and authority dependencies.

Choose sequential approval when order changes the decision

Use sequential approval when each stage creates information, authority, or a version that the next reviewer needs.

Sequential routing fits these cases:

‍

The tradeoff is accumulated wait time. Keep the chain as short as the policy allows. A title is not a reason to add another approval stage. Every reviewer should own a distinct decision.

Choose parallel approval when reviews are independent

Use parallel approval when reviewers can assess separate criteria against the same evidence without waiting for one another.

Parallel routing fits a security review, legal terms review, and data privacy review of the same vendor package. Each team owns a different question. None needs the other team’s answer to begin.

Before launching the stage, define its completion rule:

Parallel does not mean “email everyone.” The workflow still needs named roles, deadlines, rejection rules, delegation, and an event that joins the separate decisions.

A hybrid workflow often matches the real decision

A hybrid approval workflow combines parallel and sequential stages. Use it when some reviews are independent but the final authority depends on all required findings.

Consider a software purchase:

This route overlaps independent wait time without hiding the authority chain. It also makes rework explicit: if the vendor changes a material contract or security term, the workflow sends the new version back to the affected reviewers.

Define the roles, thresholds, evidence, delegation, and escalation rules in an approval matrix before you configure the route.

Build the route from states, decisions, and join rules

A reliable design needs more than a list of approvers. Write down the data and events that move the request.

Formaloo’s current dual-approval guide documents a sequential pattern with separate approver fields and On update rules that advance or reject a request. Its multi-reviewer scoring guide documents the parallel pattern: separate reviewer decisions feed Advanced logic, which evaluates the final state after every required review exists.

Operations teams can adapt those building blocks with admin-only decision fields, assignee fields, Advanced logic, and Table or Kanban views. Keep configuration details in the workflow record, then test what each requester and reviewer can see.

Avoid these routing mistakes

Test the workflow before people depend on it

Run test requests through every meaningful branch:

If your current requests still move through inboxes and spreadsheets, start with the warning signs of a broken approval workflow. Then map dependencies before choosing a routing model.

The right answer is rarely “parallel everywhere” or “sequential everywhere.” Put dependent decisions in order, run independent reviews together, and define exactly how the branches rejoin.

Book a demo to build and deploy a governed enterprise approval workflow in Formaloo.

Sources