“Human in the loop” is often added as an afterthought: a review step on everything, which slows the work, or on nothing, which removes the safety net. Placing people on purpose is a design task. These four steps decide exactly where a person approves, reviews or takes over.
Step 1 — Sort the actions by consequence
Goal: Separate what is safe to automate from what is not.
- List every action the workflow can take: read, draft, update, send, pay, delete.
- Mark each as reversible or irreversible, internal or external.
- Flag anything touching money, legal commitments, personal data or customers.
- Everything irreversible, external or flagged starts with an approval step.
You finish with: An action list with a consequence level for each.
Step 2 — Place approval points
Goal: Put a named person in front of the actions that need one.
- Assign each approval to a role, not “the team”.
- Show the approver the evidence the workflow used, not just its conclusion.
- Make approving, editing and rejecting one click each.
- Set a time limit and a fallback when an approval is not answered.
You finish with: Approval points with owners, evidence and fallbacks.
Step 3 — Write the stop rules
Goal: Decide when the workflow must stop and hand back to a person.
- Low confidence: below an agreed threshold, route to review.
- Missing or conflicting information: stop, do not guess.
- Out-of-scope requests: hand back with a short summary.
- Repeated failures: pause the workflow and alert the owner.
You finish with: A stop-rule list the workflow enforces automatically.
Step 4 — Earn autonomy with evidence
Goal: Remove approval steps only when the record supports it.
- Log every decision: what ran, what changed, who approved.
- Review approval outcomes weekly: how often was the draft accepted unchanged?
- Remove an approval only after a sustained run of unchanged approvals, and keep spot checks.
- Re-add the approval immediately if error rates rise.
You finish with: A documented, reversible path from supervised to autonomous.
Common pitfalls
- Reviewing everything, so reviewers rubber-stamp.
- Showing the approver a conclusion without the evidence.
- No fallback when an approver is away.
- Removing approvals because of a good demo instead of a good record.