Index
A received document is not necessarily approved for execution. Project control needs to distinguish draft, review and published version, preventing teams from working with divergent instructions.
How to evaluate this decision
Define identification, versioning and analysis cycle. Comments must point to the correct revision and have traceable resolution. A new publication can replace the previous one for current use without deleting the history. Distribution also matters: anyone who downloaded an old version needs to be able to identify that it has been outdated.
Criteria for comparing proposals
- Receipt: check identification, discipline and review, dealing with duplication of file names.
- Analysis: record comments, responses and approval by authorized role.
- Publication: indicate current version, recipients and replaced documents.
A scenario to discuss with the supplier
Hypothetical example: two files have the same name but different revisions. The interface should show the publication status and the relevant date, not automatically choose the last uploaded file as valid.
What to validate upon delivery
Simulate return for correction, new review and history consultation. Make sure links and downloads have enough context to distinguish approved and outdated documents.
Prepare the conversation about the project
To define the solution with Quantum9, inform document types, approval flow, volume and existing tools. The project can prioritize publishing and querying before automating all document collaboration.
Tailor-made systems · Map the company's priority