Contracts rarely stall in the legal review itself. They stall in the inbox before it, in the version someone edited halfway through, and in the signed PDF nobody filed. This guide covers how to route a contract by value and risk in Google Workspace, and when you need more than a workflow.
What's in this guide
- What a contract approval workflow involves
- Routing by value, type and risk
- Try it: how would your contract route?
- Keeping versions straight in Drive
- Vendor contracts
- Handoff to signature
- Reminders and the audit trail
- A first version you can build this week
- How to choose contract approval software
- FAQ
- Sources
Search results for contract approval software are mostly lists of contract lifecycle platforms. That helps if you need the whole lifecycle, but a lot of teams have a narrower problem: getting the right people to sign off, in the right order, without chasing them. This guide is about that problem, and about where a workflow stops being enough.
What a contract approval workflow involves
Most contract delays aren't about the legal review itself. They happen around it: a request that sits in an inbox, an approver who is out, a version that changed mid-review, a signed copy saved on someone's desktop. The process has six stages, and people usually feel the delay in the first and the last, not in the middle.
| Stage | What happens | What a workflow takes over |
|---|---|---|
| Intake | Someone requests a contract or submits one for review | A structured form captures the value, counterparty, type and attachments, so nothing arrives half complete |
| Routing | The contract goes to the right reviewers | Rules choose the path by value, type and risk, so nobody forwards it by hand |
| Review | Legal, finance or security weigh in | The document is locked, so the version that gets approved is the version that was reviewed |
| Sign-off | Approvers accept or reject | One-click decisions, with reminders and escalation if someone stalls |
| Signature | The final copy is executed | The approved file is sent to the e-signature tool automatically |
| Filing | The signed contract is stored | It is saved to the right Drive folder and the renewal date is logged |
Everything in the right-hand column is mechanical. The judgment stays with the people reviewing. The workflow just makes sure the contract reaches them with the right information, once, and that their decision is recorded.
Routing by value, type and risk
Routing is the rule that decides who sees a contract, in what order and under what conditions. Three patterns cover most contracts, and real processes combine them.
Sequential means one approver after another: a manager, then finance, then a signer. It fits sign-offs that depend on each other. Parallel means several reviewers at once, so legal and security can look at a vendor agreement together instead of in a queue. Conditional means the path changes with the contract: a small standard renewal might clear quickly, a contract over a set amount goes to finance, and a non-standard clause goes straight to legal.
Two settings keep those rules from breaking in practice. A threshold is the point where a contract needs a higher sign-off, for example anything above a set amount going to the CFO. Delegation reassigns the decision to a deputy when the approver is away, so one absence doesn't hold up a deal.
In Google Workspace, Zenphi lets you set these as rules once. It can look up the approver in Google Directory, so the request reaches the right person by role even after a reorg, and it can lock the contract while it is under review. Our approval workflow page covers the routing patterns, and our legal workflow page shows the contract version, including a value threshold that requires CFO approval.
Try it: how would your contract route?
Pick a value band, a contract type and whether the terms are standard. The tool shows one way a contract like that could be routed. The $10,000 and $50,000 lines are examples, so treat them as placeholders for your own policy.
The same rules, written out:
| If the contract is… | It could route to… | Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| A standard renewal under $10,000 | Auto-approved, then filed in Drive | Conditional |
| A standard contract under $10,000 | Manager, then e-signature and filing | Sequential |
| A standard contract from $10,000 to $50,000 | Manager and finance, then e-signature and filing | Sequential |
| A standard contract over $50,000 | Manager, finance and CFO, then e-signature and filing | Sequential |
| A vendor contract from $10,000 to $50,000 | Manager, then finance and security at the same time, then e-signature and filing | Parallel and sequential |
| Any contract with non-standard terms | Adds a legal review, whatever the value | Conditional |
Tell us your contract types and approval rules, and we'll show them running in Google Workspace.
Keeping versions straight in Drive
When a contract is approved, the executed copy can be filed in the right Drive folder, organized by counterparty and contract type, with the expiry date written to a tracker. Our legal workflow page describes this filing and tracking. Because the files stay in your Google Workspace domain, nothing has to be sent to an outside repository to be stored.
Renewals are where this pays off. A scheduled check can read the tracker and send alerts 90, 60 and 30 days before a contract expires, so an auto-renewal on unfavorable terms doesn't slip past because nobody was watching the date.
Vendor contracts
Vendor and supplier contracts usually need more hands: legal for the terms, finance for the spend, and sometimes IT or security for how the vendor handles data. That is a natural fit for parallel routing, where every required reviewer gets the contract at once and it moves on when the necessary approvals are in.
Pair it with a threshold, so a small renewal and a six-figure master agreement don't follow the same chain. If vendor contracts are your main problem and you also need supplier records, risk scoring and renewal management in one place, look at dedicated tooling, which we cover below.
Handoff to signature
Once the internal approvals are in, the approved file goes out for e-signature. According to our legal workflow page, Zenphi works with DocuSign or Adobe Sign for this step, and the signed copy is filed back in Drive so the executed version and its record end up together.
Reminders and the audit trail
Approvals stall when a request sits forgotten. Reminders, a deadline on each task and escalation to a deputy keep things moving when someone is slow or away. The aim isn't to rush the reviewer. It is to make sure one absence doesn't cost the deal three days.
For contracts, the record matters as much as the routing. Every step can be logged with the approver's identity, a timestamp, the version and the decision, and that log can be exported for an audit or a dispute, without anyone rebuilding it from email threads.
Zenphi reports a 68% faster contract approval cycle from intake to signed. That figure is Zenphi's own and has not been independently verified, so treat it as a vendor claim and measure your own cycle time before and after.
A first version you can build this week
You don't need the whole process mapped to start. A first contract flow can be as short as this:
- A request comes in through a Google Form.
- The contract is generated from a Google Docs template, or attached.
- It routes by value: one reviewer for a standard contract, a legal-then-finance chain above your threshold.
- On approval it is exported to PDF and sent to DocuSign or Adobe Sign.
- The signed copy is filed in Drive and the decision is logged.
If building that by hand sounds like the hard part, Zenphi's assistant, ZAIA, can draft the structure from a plain-English description, and you adjust the specifics. Our tutorial on creating, approving and reviewing contracts with AI builds a version of this step by step, with a video.
ZAIA drafts the flow from a plain-English description, and you adjust the details.
How to choose contract approval software
"Best" depends on what is slowing you down, so match the tool to the job rather than to a ranked list. Three kinds of tool show up most often.
| Kind of tool | Examples | It fits when | Keep in mind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contract lifecycle management (CLM) | Ironclad, Sirion, Icertis, Conga, Agiloft | You need drafting, redlining, clause libraries, obligation tracking and a searchable repository at scale | Usually a bigger rollout than a routing layer |
| Procurement suites | Coupa, SAP Ariba | Vendor contracts have to connect to purchase orders, catalogs and spend controls | More platform than you need if you only want contract approvals |
| An approval layer in the tools you already use | Approveit (Slack, Teams and email), Zenphi (Google Workspace) | Routing and sign-off is the bottleneck, not the whole lifecycle | It doesn't replace a contract repository or a redlining tool |
Our read: if your contracts live in Google Workspace and the thing slowing you down is getting the right people to sign off in the right order, an approval layer gets you running faster than a full lifecycle platform. If you need redlining, clause libraries and obligation management, a CLM is the right tool, and you can still route approvals around it.
Whatever you shortlist, run it against these questions:
- Where does your team work? A Google-first team and a Microsoft-first team will be happiest with different tools. Zenphi is Google-native and also has actions for SharePoint, OneDrive, Outlook, Excel Online, Word and Entra ID, which helps hybrid teams and teams mid-migration.
- How much of the lifecycle do you need? Only approval and signature, or drafting, a repository and obligation tracking too?
- How complex is the routing? Check for sequential, parallel and conditional paths in one flow, plus thresholds and delegation.
- What does the record look like? Look for the approver, a timestamp and the version on every decision, and a way to export it.
- How is it priced? Know whether you pay per user, per document or per workflow, because that decides how the cost grows with your volume.
Walk us through where contracts get stuck today, and we'll show what a routing layer would cover.
FAQ
How do I automate contract review and approval routing?
Start by writing down your contract types and the rule for each: who approves, in what order, and at what value or risk it escalates. Then build that into a workflow with a form for intake, conditional routing by value and risk, a locked review, e-signature, and automatic filing with the decision logged. In Google Workspace you can do this without code.
Can a contract go to legal and finance at the same time?
Yes. That is parallel routing: both review at once, and the contract moves on when the required approvals are in. You can combine it with a sequential step, for example a parallel legal and security review followed by a final finance sign-off.
What happens if an approver is on leave?
Reminders and deadlines nudge the request, and if nobody responds within the window you set, it escalates or goes to a deputy, so one absence doesn't stall the contract.
Where does the signed contract end up?
The executed copy is filed in the Drive folder you define, commonly organized by counterparty and contract type, with the renewal date logged to a tracker and the approval record kept for audit.
Do I need a contract lifecycle management tool for this?
Not for approval and signature. A CLM earns its cost when you need the whole lifecycle: redlining, clause libraries, obligation management and a large repository. If the bottleneck is routing and sign-off, an approval workflow in the tools you already use is often enough.
What are the best vendor contract approval tools?
It depends on the job. For the full contract lifecycle, look at CLM platforms such as Ironclad, Sirion, Icertis, Conga or Agiloft. For procurement-led teams, Coupa or SAP Ariba. For routing and sign-off inside the tools you already use, Approveit works in Slack and Teams, and Zenphi works natively in Google Workspace. The comparison above shows when each one fits.
Sources
- Zenphi — Approval workflow software for Google Workspace
- Zenphi — Legal workflow automation
- Zenphi — Create, approve and review legal contracts using AI
- Approveit — Best vendor management software
- Conga — Contract approval workflow: what it is and how to improve
- Sirion — Contract approval automation tools
Pages were checked on October 14, 2026 and can change. The Zenphi pages are our own, so read their claims with that in mind. The 68% cycle-time figure is reported by Zenphi and has not been independently verified.
Related reading
Approval workflow software for Google Workspace
Routing patterns, features to look for and common approval workflows.
Read more →Create, approve and review contracts with AI
A step-by-step build, with a video walkthrough.
Read the tutorial →Legal workflow automation
Contracts, NDAs, intake and expiry monitoring in one place.
Read more →Multi-level approval workflow
Sequential, parallel and conditional routing explained.
Read more →Bring one contract type and see its approval path built.
Start with the one that waits the longest today.
