A position-change request needs more than an approval button. Reviewers need to understand what would change, when it would apply, and which decision each person is responsible for making.
Define the requests your team handles
Start with the changes that occur most often: adding a position, changing its approved FTE, replacing an employee, or eliminating a position. List the information needed for each type rather than asking every requester to complete the same long checklist.
For example, a request to increase a coordinator position from 0.8 to 1.0 FTE should state the current and proposed capacity, department, reason, and intended effective date. Include supporting budget information if the decision requires financial review.
Give each reviewer a clear responsibility
Use the following as a discussion example, not a required approval order:
| Reviewer | Question to answer | Useful supporting information |
|---|---|---|
| Department manager | Does the proposed capacity meet the department’s need? | Workload explanation, alternatives, effective date |
| HR | Is the proposed position structure appropriate? | Job, reporting relationship, assignment implications |
| Finance | Is the budget implication understood and acceptable? | Relevant budget assumptions and financial comparison |
| Final decision owner | Is the request ready for an organizational decision? | Prior decisions and unresolved conditions |
Your organization determines the actual reviewers and order. Add a step when it has a distinct purpose, and identify who can cover it when the usual reviewer is unavailable.
Keep the proposed date visible
The date a reviewer decides a request and the date a position change takes effect answer different questions. Reviewers should see the proposed effective date throughout the process.
Check related assignments as well. If approved capacity falls from 1.0 to 0.8 FTE while an assignment remains at 1.0 FTE, that leaves 0.2 FTE above the new approved capacity. The request needs a clear staffing follow-up rather than an assumption that the assignment will change automatically.
Decide what happens when information changes
Tell requesters how to respond when a reviewer needs clarification or the proposal changes. Keep the reason, supporting files, and discussion with the request so the next reviewer can understand the decision.
Agree on who may correct or close an open request. Avoid treating a message in a separate email thread as sufficient evidence that the recorded proposal has changed.
Track the work after approval
Approval may leave practical work to complete: notifying the department, updating a connected system, arranging recruitment, or reviewing employee assignments. Give each follow-up an owner and a clear completion condition.
Separate the decision from that follow-up. A request can have an approved outcome while its operational work is still outstanding. That distinction helps teams answer both “Was this approved?” and “What still needs to happen?”
Test one representative request
Before expanding the process, walk through a common change with the people who will request and review it. Confirm that each reviewer sees enough information, access is appropriate, the effective date is clear, and the result can be found afterward.
Explore approval workflows to see how FTE Tree keeps position requests, reviewers, discussions, and decisions together. For product steps, read set up request workflows, submit a position request, and review and resolve issues.