Internal requests
Access, procurement, maintenance, materials, and other recurring employee asks.
Operations Ops, HR, admin, and procurement teams with requests and approvals
Requests and approvals follow a route — not a chat thread
We move the process out of chat and memory into a clear route: who starts, which fields are required, who decides, and what happens on delay.
01Request
02Check
03Approver
04Owner
OutputDecision with history
A missed deadline triggers a reminder or agreed escalation.
Practical outcome
A request gets required fields, a route, status, and escalation; decisions stay in history
Problem
Requests live in chat, ownership is unclear, and deadlines or decisions need manual chasing
Primary route
employee request → field checks → approval → task → notification
A good fit for
Which processes are worth formalizing
Ops, HR, admin, and procurement teams with requests and approvals
Approvals
Sequential or parallel decisions by amount, department, and other formal conditions.
Operational control
Deadlines, queues, owners, reminders, and escalations for unfinished stages.
Fit / boundaries
What must not go unchecked
Rare exceptions are not hidden in automation: they keep a manual path
01We automate only agreed rules and roles
02Rare exceptions need a manual path
03Access rights are designed before connecting sensitive data
Working scenarios
Requests, approvals, and escalations
Demonstration routes, not client results. Exact logic depends on your rules, data, and systems.
Scenario / 01
Access request
The employee picks system and role, a manager confirms, the owner records the result.
1Request2Manager3Owner4Access
Scenario / 02
Spend approval
The route depends on amount and category; decisions and comments stay in history.
1Ask2Rule3Decision4History
Scenario / 03
Deadline control
A reminder fires before the due date; after breach the task escalates by agreed rule.
1Deadline2Reminder3Overdue4Escalate
Engagement trigger
When chat stopped being a process
The process spans several roles and no longer fits a shared chat or spreadsheet
- 01Requests start as messages in a shared chat
- 02Employees do not know current status
- 03Approvals depend on manual reminders
- 04Decision history cannot be reconstructed
Solution scope
Roles, statuses, and decision history
- Process and role map
- Request forms and statuses
- Approval rules
- Alerts and escalations
- Action history and documentation
Data and systems in the loopTelegramEmailGoogle WorkspaceNotionREST APIDatabases
How we launch
From a real process to a working loop
Tools are chosen after we verify inputs, exceptions, and the success criterion.
- 01
We observe the process
Actual request path, workarounds, and delay causes.
- 02
We lock roles
Initiators, owners, approvers, and data each role may see.
- 03
We describe states
Required fields, transitions, SLAs, return for rework, and cancel.
- 04
We build the interface
Bot, web form, or internal portal matched to action frequency and complexity.
- 05
We connect tools
Tasks, documents, and alerts into tools you already use via API.
Do we need a separate internal portal?+
Not always. A simple route may need only a bot or form; complex roles, registries, and search may need a portal.
Can approvals be automated?+
Yes when roles, required fields, approver selection rules, and allowed decisions are defined.
What happens on overdue?+
The system reminds the owner and escalates by a pre-agreed route when needed.
Will employees see only their requests?+
Role-based access can limit what authors, owners, approvers, and leaders see and can do.
Can we start without a full brief?+
Yes. Map the real process, sample requests, roles, and problem cases; that becomes the diagram and acceptance criteria.
First step
Map an internal process
We'll map inputs, exceptions, and constraints. You leave with a priority scenario and a next step — no obligation to start a project.
Map an internal processService: Internal processes