I agree with this.  What we end up doing is adding a page or field for the supervisor/manager to sign after verifying the record and/or proper completion.  We don’t have it on all templates.  For some, where verification might be random, we add a logic question that asks “is this record being verified” which drives showing that signature.  This allows completion of the inspection in cases where it is not being verified.  

I could see a template option for verification that builds this in.

1. Verification on or off
2. Verification required or optional
3. Verification driven off the logic of a certain question 

The only situation where this wouldn’t work is in cases where an inspection may be open for hours, filling in fields over time or adding repeat sections over time, and they are only verifying a section for a specific hour in the template but not the other portions for previous or later times.  That’s why the current signature and logic on questions has mostly worked well.

Thank you for sharing your ideas Kimon and Corey. 

Improving on the current mechanisms, such as the ones you’ve mentioned to deliver a richer “Inspections Approvals” experience is something that is top of mind for us.

Another idea we have been exploring is to look at adding an extra state inbetween ‘In progress’ and ‘complete’ potentially called ‘pending approval’ as a way to add extra tools for customers to use in their approvals workflow. 

Keen to hear if that might be of interest at all? 

To me, the “Inspections” list are those that need review.  I have been preaching to review the record, then archive it. That removes it from the iPads and editable state.  My ask in that process (see Document Management | Community (safetyculture.com)) is to capture who archived it and when, as well as allowing archive to occur while viewing the web report (if you have permission).  

I suppose you could also add an option, per template, to turn on the “in progress” feature. You would need to have edit permission to the report to be able to “approve” it so it can be marked as complete.  Then the process described above for archiving can occur.  This would work in many situations for us, but not in all.  In the scenario when an inspection is open and updated throughout the shift, we might have a supervisor verify a specific instance/task in the inspection but not the entire thing.

Hey everyone! We are excited to mark this one as released with the recent launch of Inspection Approvals!

Thoughts, concerns and queries, all welcome 

Hey ​@Bianca.Taylor . I did get onto support yesterday to ask if it is possible to add additional approvals and relocate them into the template. The answer was no. 

For me, some inspections have multiple approvals. The concept is brilliant but to add to the feature by allowing multiples would be incredible. 

I am working on a template where there are two phases of approval, and each phase has 2 levels of approvals (the site and corporate).  For now, I’m putting the first plant approval on a separate page, then the built-in approval kicks off to corporate. Within that approval, I am using logic for phase 2 after the signature, which will just have more questions for the second phase’s approval questions/signatures/dates.

Additionally, we have situations where the approver needs to change based on logic or a schedule.

Thanks very much for your comments ​@Andrew Gabb and ​@Corey - I hear exactly where you’re both coming from. I can see ​@Corey you recently posted an idea that references multiple inspection approvals and I do encourage you ​@Andrew Gabb to add your vote.

One of our Inspection Product Managers, Karen, also provided a response in regard to the topic. I will continue to provide updates on this as they’re shared. Thank you both in advance