Approval Routing After a Matrix Reorganization
GlobalFlow manufactures pumps and has 1,400 workers in the US and Canada under two legal employers but one shared business unit for operations. In January the company moved from country-based departments to four global product lines. The department tree still shows country groupings because finance uses it for cost allocation. Absence requests now route to the old country HR managers, while performance documents route to the new product-line leaders. About 300 leave requests sat unapproved for two weeks; some product leaders can see their teams in the directory but cannot open absence records. A few Canadian leaders are asked to approve US employees. The HRIS team is under pressure to 'fix the department tree' before quarter end. You are asked to advise on the approval and security design without disrupting payroll costing.
1. Which hierarchy is causing each symptom, and what should be changed first? Explain how you would decide between changing the department tree and changing the absence approval rule.
Read the worked answer
The symptoms point to two different hierarchies. Absence requests are routing to the old country HR managers because the absence approval rule is using the department manager or a department-based approval group, and the department tree still reflects country groupings. Performance documents are routing to product-line leaders because talent tasks typically use the line manager from the assignment. That explains why the two processes diverged after the reorganization.
I would not rebuild the department tree first. Finance uses that tree for cost allocation, so changing it would alter payroll costing and reporting. Instead, I would confirm the intended policy. If leave should be approved by the line manager, change the absence approval rule to the supervisory hierarchy and correct assignment manager records with effective dates. If leave must be approved by the department manager, then the department tree is the right control point and must be maintained, but finance must be involved because costing changes. The decision should be based on policy, not on which fix is faster.
2. A Canadian product leader must approve leave for three US employees. What security and approval conditions must be true, and what would you test?
Read the worked answer
Two conditions must both be true: the approval rule must resolve that person as the approver, and the person's data role must let them view the US employees' absence records. Approval routing and data security are separate. The leader may appear in the approval chain as line manager, but if their person security profile is limited to their legal employer or department, they can receive the notification and still not open the record.
I would verify the assignment manager relationship for the three US employees, including effective dates around the leave request. Then I would review the Canadian leader's data role and person security profile to confirm it includes the relevant manager hierarchy or the specific employees. In a sandbox, I would create a test absence for one US employee, submit it, and inspect the approval history. I would also use security preview to confirm the leader can see the person and absence record. Finally, I would test that the leader cannot see unrelated US employees, because granting broad US access would create a new privacy issue.
3. What is the risk of rebuilding the department tree to match product lines, and how would you mitigate it?
Read the worked answer
Rebuilding the department tree to mirror product lines would solve the symptom only if leave is meant to route by department. It would also change many downstream behaviors. Department is used in payroll costing, budgeting, headcount reporting, security by department, and possibly absence and approval rules. A midyear rebuild can split historical headcount and cost, and effective-dated changes may leave open leave requests pointing to old departments.
Mitigation starts with impact analysis: identify payroll costing mappings, department-based security profiles, approval rules, and reports that reference department. If the change is approved, use effective dates after the current pay period and communicate before the next absence cycle. Keep old departments inactive rather than deleting them, and test with open leave requests. I would also recommend separating the organization design question from the immediate approval fix: correct assignment managers now if line-manager approval is the policy, and treat the department redesign as a finance-owned project.