An approval process has one commercial purpose: to put a decision in front of the right person while that decision can still change the outcome. Almost everything that goes wrong with meetings approvals is a variation on failing that test.
The classic sequence in an organisation without a designed process runs: department identifies a need, contacts venues, verbally agrees a date and rate, raises a purchase order, finance approves it. By then the supplier is chosen, the rate is set, the terms are whatever the venue offered, and the approver is signing off a decision already made. Fixing that sequence is the core of corporate meetings management.
The workflow
- 01
Requirement raised
One route in, whatever the department. A short structured request, not an email describing a vague idea. If this moment is missed, the event is invisible for the rest of its life. - 02
Triage and classification
The request is checked against policy scope and thresholds: what band, what approvals, does it involve travel or external attendees. Minutes, not days. - 03
Budget confirmation
The budget holder confirms funds and intent before sourcing starts — a cheap step that prevents effort being spent on events that were never going to happen. - 04
Approval to proceed
The approval that matters. It authorises sourcing and, within a stated ceiling, commitment. It happens before any supplier is contacted. - 05
Sourcing
Venues approached against a proper brief, with comparisons produced. Handled internally or by an appointed partner — see venue procurement and the RFP entry. - 06
Selection and commercial review
The recommendation goes back with terms visible: rate, payment schedule, cancellation scale, attrition, minimum spend. Terms, not just price. - 07
Contract and signature
Signed by someone with the delegated authority to sign it. Non-standard terms go to legal. - 08
Record and report
Event, supplier, value and terms land in the same record as everything else, so the programme has a dataset rather than a pile of invoices. See meetings data and reporting.
Employees and departments
A requirement exists: a conference, a training day, a board meeting, a client event.
Central meetings process
One brief, one route, one set of rules about what happens next.
Venues, suppliers and event delivery
Sourcing, negotiation, contracting and — where needed — running the event itself.
Data capture
What was requested, what was bought, from whom, at what value, on what terms.
Procurement and finance reporting
Programme-level information that can be reviewed, challenged and acted on.
The reporting layer feeds back into the central process. That feedback loop is the difference between collecting data and managing a programme.
What to capture at the point of request
The request form is the most undervalued artefact in the programme. It is the only point at which information can be captured cheaply, because afterwards the requester has moved on and every question costs an email. Keep it short enough to complete in five minutes and structured enough to analyse later: a long form is the main reason people go around the process.
- Requester, department and cost centre — so spend can be attributed without reconstruction.
- Event type and purpose — training, client event, internal conference, board meeting. This is what makes category reporting possible.
- Dates and flexibility — a requirement with two possible weeks is worth materially more in negotiation than a fixed Tuesday.
- Delegate numbers and profile — internal, client, external, mixed.
- Location requirement — a specific city, a region, or genuinely open.
- Indicative budget — the number the department has, not the number they hope to spend.
- Accommodation and travel needs — flagged here, because it changes the approval path.
- Accessibility and dietary requirements — a yes/no at this stage; detail is collected later and handled carefully, as set out on duty of care.
- Anything already discussed with a supplier — asked plainly, because if the answer is yes the process needs to know now.
Setting thresholds that do not strangle small events
A twelve-person training day at £2,400 does not need a director’s signature. A £60,000 client conference with a 90 per cent cancellation scale does. The design question is where the lines sit and how many there are.
Three bands is usually enough: the lowest requires the route and the data capture with budget-holder approval only; the middle adds the category owner and competitive sourcing; the top adds senior sign-off and legal review of the contract. Decision rights for each band come from meetings governance.
Two refinements matter. Set thresholds on total committed exposure rather than deposit or headline day-delegate rate, because that is what the organisation is actually risking. And include non-financial triggers regardless of value: overseas destinations, external client attendance, regulated audiences, and any event where the organisation’s name appears publicly.
Urgency and genuine exceptions
Some requirements really are urgent — a results announcement, a crisis response, a client opportunity with a two-day window. A process that cannot accommodate them will be bypassed and then distrusted.
The answer is a fast lane, defined rather than improvised: who can invoke it, what reduced approval applies, what the maximum commitment is, and that the paperwork is completed afterwards rather than never. An exception that never gets recorded is indistinguishable from non-compliance in the data.
The test of a fast lane is what proportion of activity uses it. A handful of events a year means it is working. A quarter of the programme means the standard route is too slow and the fast lane has become the process.
Who signs
Venue contracts commit the organisation to terms extending well beyond the headline fee. Cancellation scales, attrition clauses and minimum spend commitments are all contractual exposure, as meetings risk management sets out.
Signature authority should follow the existing authority matrix, applied to committed exposure rather than invoice value. In practice the list of people who may sign an event contract is shorter than the list of people who currently do.
Where an external partner contracts on the organisation’s behalf, the authority question does not disappear — it becomes a question of what that partner is mandated to commit to and at what level. Write it into the engagement rather than assuming it.
Making approval faster, not slower
Every control added to this workflow costs time somewhere, and time is what the requester cares about. A process that adds three approvals and two weeks will lose to a phone call to a hotel, every time.
The way out is not fewer controls but better sequencing and preparation. Pre-agreed rates through a preferred venue programme remove a negotiation cycle. Standing terms with regular suppliers remove a legal review per booking. A single route in, staffed by people who know the brief format, removes the back-and-forth at the start. Done properly a governed process is faster than an ungoverned one, which is the only argument requesters find persuasive. For how this fits a wider build, see implementing Strategic Meetings Management and how to build an SMM programme.
Frequently asked questions
01How many approval levels should a meetings process have?
Three bands suits most organisations. More than that and the process becomes hard to explain — people cannot follow a rule they cannot remember.
02Should approval happen before or after sourcing?
Before. A lighter confirmation at selection is reasonable for larger events, but the authorising decision belongs at the front, before any supplier conversation has created an expectation.
03Do small internal meetings need to go through this?
They need to go through the route so they are visible; they do not need to go through the approvals. Separating those two things stops a governance process becoming an obstacle to a twelve-person training day.
04What about events booked before the process existed?
Record them retrospectively rather than pretending the baseline is clean — they form part of the picture described in how to measure meetings spend, and the terms already signed are worth reviewing.
05Can approval sit in our existing purchase-order system?
Often yes, and reusing a system beats introducing one. The limitation is timing: purchase orders are usually raised after a supplier is chosen, so the system must accommodate an approval happening earlier than it was designed for.
06How do we handle recurring meetings?
Approve the programme rather than each instance — an annual authorisation with a ceiling.
Related reading
- 01GovernanceMeetings governanceThe decision rights and delegated authority behind the workflow.
- 02GovernanceMeetings policyWhat the written rules should say about thresholds and routes.
- 03The disciplineMeetings procurementWhat happens between approval and contract.
- 04GuideHow to build an SMM programmeThe full sequence, with the approval workflow in context.
- 05The disciplineWhat is Strategic Meetings Management?The full explanation of the discipline this page sits inside.
