The most significant anomaly in the proposed process model is that it does not provide enough information for employees to accurately track their activities. For example, there are no tasks or actions that are clearly assigned to them (e.g., SUBMIT, APPROVE, FINAL_APPROVE), and no clear path for employees to identify the next steps after completing a task.

Additionally, it would be beneficial if each employee could see who else is involved in the process and where they stand. For example, an employee might see that there are multiple levels of approval required (e.g., PRE_APPROVER, ADMINISTRATION, SUPERVISOR) before a decision can be made, but without knowing how these different roles work together, it's unclear what actions need to happen next.

Furthermore, the absence of clear communication channels or feedback loops between employees and supervisors means that they may not always know when a task is complete. This could lead to errors or inefficiencies in the system as employees are unsure if their actions have been acknowledged or followed up on.

Overall, while this proposed process model provides some basic steps for managing approvals and requests, it lacks clarity around roles, communication, and follow-up.