Approval Workflow
An approval workflow fixes who signs off which artifact, in which order, and by when.
What this is about
Productions rarely stall because work is slow; they stall because approvals are. Five stakeholders with veto power and no sequence produce contradictory feedback and endless loops. A working workflow names one consolidating voice on the client side, puts approval deadlines into the timeline, and defines what silence means — approved after the deadline, or blocked. Agree the workflow at project start, in writing, because retrofitting it during the first conflict never goes well.
A term only helps when everyone on set means the same thing by it — so what follows is how it is used, not a dictionary definition.
What runs differently here
In planning terms, that means:
- One consolidating voice per side — parallel veto holders multiply loops
- Approval deadlines are timeline items; silence needs a defined meaning
- Feedback on the wrong version costs a full loop — version discipline is part of the workflow
With TillyGen
TillyGen anchors approval points in the production plan, so every sign-off has a date, an owner and a consequence when it slips.
Change one constraint and the consequences travel through the whole plan: affected shots are flagged, the call sheet is regenerated, and nobody keeps working from yesterday's version.
Frequently asked
How do I handle contradictory feedback from several client stakeholders?
Do not resolve it yourself — route it back. The workflow should name one person on the client side who consolidates internal opinions into a single instruction.
How long does it take to get started with TillyGen?
A first project takes under an hour to set up. There is no configuration phase in which templates and fields have to be defined before the tool produces anything.
Can the results be exported?
Yes — as PDF for the crew, CSV for downstream systems and through the API for anything automated. The plan stays the source; the exports are views of it.