Match Documents to the Work Process
Documents are most useful when the work requires a lasting reference, collaborative review or a record of what happened
Developed from a conversation between Pete Winn and Andy David
Some information needs to remain available as a reference, particularly when it describes systems or processes that people will return to. Record-keeping requirements strengthen that case, although the record doesn’t always need to be the main workspace. It might be another kind of artifact, or simply a byproduct created as the work unfolds.
Documents are also valuable when several people need to review the same material. Pete pointed to Google Docs, where people working in different locations can review a document together, leave comments and track changes. In that setting, the ability to collaborate on the document is often more valuable than its formatting or presentation.
The nature of the work should probably decide what survives. A university campus can justify tens of thousands of documents because construction demands extensive planning, coordination and records. For smaller software projects, the cost of building and iterating has fallen considerably with AI agents, reducing the need for extensive planning documents. A plan that would once have required several rounds of review can sometimes be replaced by building a working version and making changes directly.