Approvals Without the Slack Chase: An Automation Builder’s Zapier Forms & Tables Queue for Human Review

Approval workflows often get sold like this:

“Just automate the approval.”

Lovely idea.

In real life, approvals are where a lot of systems quietly fall apart.

A request comes in through email.

Someone drops a link into Slack.

Another person replies in a thread nobody else sees.

A decision gets made in a meeting.

The requester gets no clear answer.

The ops person chases everyone like a part-time detective.

The problem is not that you need more pings.

The problem is that most teams do not have an approval queue.

They have a loose collection of messages, reminders, screenshots, and best intentions.

This is exactly the sort of thing a calm automation setup should fix.

Not by removing humans, but by giving them one obvious place to review, decide, and hand work back cleanly.

If you want help designing these kinds of operator-friendly systems, the best place to start is the automation page. The goal is simple: fewer chases, clearer decisions, and a trail everyone can trust.

Why approval workflows feel slow even when the business moves fast

Most teams are not actually short on tools.

They are short on decision structure.

When approvals feel messy, it is usually because one or more of these is true:

• Requests arrive through too many channels.
• Nobody can see what is waiting for review.
• Approvers do not know the deadline or impact.
• Rejections are not logged clearly.
• Approved work does not hand off cleanly into execution.
• AI or automation gets involved before the business has defined what still needs a human decision.

That last bit matters a lot.

Zapier is brilliant for moving data.

It is also great at speeding up the boring admin around approval processes.

But if the team has not agreed who decides what, by when, and based on which information, all you have done is automate the chaos around the decision.

What a calm approval queue actually looks like

A good approval system should feel a bit boring.

That is how you know it is working.

At minimum, it should give you:

1. One intake point

Every request starts in one obvious place.

That could be a Zapier Form embedded in an internal page, shared as a link, or used behind a service request flow.

2. One queue

Every submission lands in the same structured holding area.

This is where Zapier Tables can be incredibly useful.

Instead of approval requests disappearing into email or chat, they sit in a visible table with status, owner, priority, and due date.

3. One decision record

For each request, you should be able to answer:

• Who requested it?
• What are they asking for?
• Who needs to approve it?
• What was the decision?
• When was it made?
• What happens next?

4. One handoff into execution

Once approved, the request should move into the tool where the work gets done.

For a lot of teams, that means ClickUp.

Approved? Create or update the task.

Rejected? Log the reason and notify the requester.

Needs more info? Send it back cleanly instead of leaving it in limbo.

Why Zapier Forms & Tables are useful here

This is where the newer Zapier stack becomes much more interesting for operators.

Zapier Forms let you capture structured requests without asking people to send “quick messages” that turn into long hunts later.

You can:

• Show confirmation messages
• Redirect users after submission
• Trigger a Zap
• Apply conditional logic to fields
• Keep the request format consistent

Zapier Tables then give you a practical queue layer.

Instead of sending everything straight into an app and hoping for the best, you can store and manage submissions first:

• filter them
• assign approvers
• update statuses
• search records
• create linked relationships
• keep a visible audit trail

That is useful even before you bring AI into the conversation.

And if you do later add AI for routing, summaries, or categorisation, you still have a human checkpoint sitting in the middle.

How to build an approval queue that does not rely on Slack archaeology

Here is the pattern I recommend.

Step 1: Define which approvals deserve a queue

Not every question needs a workflow.

Use this for requests that are:

• repeated often
• high enough risk to need a named approver
• annoying enough that they currently create a lot of chasing
• clear enough that a form can capture the important context

Good examples:

• discount approvals
• budget requests
• new software requests
• content sign-off
• scope changes
• exceptions to a standard process

Step 2: Build a form that captures decision-ready context

The most common approval mistake is making the reviewer do detective work.

The form should answer the questions the approver always asks anyway.

For example:

• Request title
• Request type
• Why it is needed
• Deadline
• Team or client affected
• Estimated cost or impact
• Recommended owner if approved

If different request types need different data, use conditional fields.

That keeps the form short while still capturing what matters.

Step 3: Store every submission in Zapier Tables

Once submitted, each request should create a record in a Table.

Useful columns usually include:

• request ID
• requester
• request type
• status
• approver
• date submitted
• target decision date
• decision notes
• linked ClickUp task URL

This becomes the queue.

Not Slack. Not inbox search. Not somebody’s memory.

Step 4: Route the request to the right reviewer

Now automate the boring part.

Based on the request type, cost, client, or team, route the record to the correct approver.

That can mean:

• assigning the reviewer in the Table
• sending a concise email or chat message
• creating a ClickUp task for review if that is where the team already works

The key is that the notification points back to the record, not to a vague message thread.

Step 5: Capture the decision properly

This is the step teams often skip.

Approval systems do not just need a “yes” or “no”.

They need a clear record of why.

For each decision, capture:

• approved / rejected / needs more info
• decision notes
• date decided
• approver name
• next action

This protects you later.

If someone asks, “Why did this get approved?” or “Who said no?” you are not relying on screenshots.

Step 6: Hand approved work into ClickUp

Once approved, create the work where it will be managed.

For example:

• Create a ClickUp task from a template
• Add the requester as a watcher or commenter
• Populate the right custom fields
• Set due dates or stages based on the approved request type
• Post the task link back into the Zapier Table record

Now the handoff is visible and complete.

The queue captured the decision.

ClickUp runs the delivery.

Where human review still matters

This is the bit people sometimes get wrong when they get excited about AI and automation.

You should not automate away the human part of the process if the real value is in judgement.

A human should probably stay in the loop when:

• the request changes scope or budget
• the request affects customers directly
• the decision requires trade-offs, not just rules
• the submission includes incomplete or risky context
• a policy exception is being made

Automation should make that judgement easier to apply.

It should not pretend to replace it.

Adding guardrails before this turns into a black box

If you later introduce AI steps, summaries, or routing rules, keep a few boundaries in place:

• Do not let an AI summary become the only source of truth.
• Keep the original submission intact.
• Log every status change.
• Make the approver explicit.
• Keep sensitive data checks in place.
• Ensure rejected requests go somewhere visible, not into a dead end.

This is where governance matters more than novelty.

The best approval system is not the cleverest one.

It is the one the team can still explain six months later.

What to measure once this is live

A queue is only useful if it gets better over time.

Track things like:

• average time to decision
• number of requests waiting past SLA
• most common rejection reasons
• request types that bounce back for missing info
• approved work that still stalls after handoff

Those patterns tell you where to improve the form, the routing logic, or the decision criteria.

Frequently Asked Questions

Should approvals live in Zapier or in ClickUp?

Use Zapier for intake, routing, and queue logic. Use ClickUp for the work that follows approval. The queue handles the decision; ClickUp handles execution.

What if different approval types need different reviewers?

That is exactly where Zapier Forms, conditional logic, and Tables help. Capture the right context in the form, then route records based on request type, cost, team, or another rule.

Can AI approve requests for us?

It can help summarise, classify, or flag risky requests, but high-value or high-risk approvals should still have a named human owner. Automation should support judgement, not fake it.

‍

Almost done! When you're ready, here are four ways I can help you:

Read it.

A guide on how to use ClickUp and actually make it work for you.

Connect it.

Let's be LinkedIn pals. I make funny videos sometimes.

Workshop it.

Book a 30-minute chat to talk processes and build a Miro together.

Go for it.

Fill in my contact form — let's talk ClickUp or Automations. Whatever tickles your pickle.

Wanna hear from the unfiltered version of me? Sign up to my newsletter. The Working Notes. 2 minute reads. Behind the scenes. Hopefully helpful. Maybe funny.

‍

‍

Book a call with Jack

‍