How can you decide the appropriate level of detail for project documentation?

Documentation is tricky. These are the steps I follow to build useful documentation: 1- My Audience: If it's for developers, focus on technical details like code snippets and API references. For project managers, include overviews, timelines, and resources. 2- Define Purpose: Is it to guide development, facilitate maintenance, or provide a reference? 3- Complexity: Complex projects with many dependencies require thorough documentation, and simpler projects need high-level overviews. 4- Maintainability: When documentation becomes a burden to maintain, it is dead. 5- Use of Visuals: Diagrams reduce the need for extensive written explanations. The key is to provide enough information to be useful without overwhelming the reader.

Couple of things which are working for my team during fixing appropriate level of detail for project documentation are (1) purpose of document and its audience and (2) progressive elaboration rather than dumping complex details from day one or keeping documentation on a very superficial level throughout project phases.

It starts with purpose, why are you creating the documentation? who is the consumer? how it's connected with project goals and deliverables? Basis the proper assessment, decide the amount of details you want to bring in to the documentation. Secondly, using the right tools and methods to communicate the message concisely, clearly and accurate. Less is more!

Simply put, only document what you need to build a quality user acceptable solution. Everything else in the process is waste. There is value is setting and defining the user needs, but only to the level to build a demonstrable product which you can iterate on through end user evaluation.

It should always be purpose related ensuring client specific requests and standards are incorporated with standards always preceding all else.

First priority - What is legally required (even if not asked for) Second - What does the contract ask for (not always the same). Third - What is needed to make the project run smoothly. Then you can start to think about adhering to standards and making things as consistent as possible. Without the first 3 steps you can have great documentation but still be in a lot of hot water!

1. Complexity: Rule: Tailor to complexity. Example: Simple projects, concise docs; complex, detailed. 2. Stakeholder Needs: Rule: Customize for stakeholders. Example: Execs want summaries; teams, detailed plans. 3. Project Lifecycle: Rule: Adjust by phase. Example: Early stages, detailed plans; later stages, focus on execution. 4. Risk Management: Rule: High risk, high detail. 5. Team Expertise: Rule: Tailor to team experience. Example: Experienced teams need less detail. 6. Communication Preferences: Rule: Match stakeholder preferences. Example: Visual summaries or detail based on preference. 7. Project Size/Duration: Rule: Adjust to project scale. Example: Small projects, concise docs; large projects, extensive.

Es muy interesante establecer un estandar de documentación, una manera de bocetar o diagramar flujos donde la iconografia y representaciones tengan estandares y se sigan por todos lo que participen de la documentación. Así es como se facilita la edición, actualización y lectura comprensiva de la documentación de los proyectos.

Balance clarity and conciseness when deciding documentation detail. Enough information for understanding without overloading the target audience's level of expertise. Factor in the complexity of the project, more complicated projects will need greater depth. Update any changes as they happen. Attempt to establish a balance that allows the message to be comprehended, while at the same time limiting the gratuitous complexity of the wording, in order to facilitate effective communication among team members and stakeholders.

The standards should be treated as guidelines (or maybe as lessons learned that have some general application). They should be tailored as necessary with 'the minimum' in mind, consistent with safety, security and legal requirements. In a way they are like the proliferation of laws in states--someone has to enforce these things and if there's no consequence then why even bloat your processes?

To select the most appropriate tool, one needs to know the environment, the skills, and the objectives of his customers—air-gapped applications vs. cloud, engineers or technicians, manufacturing or labs. The more accurate the segmentation is, the better the tool selection will be.

'Right' and 'optimal' are not the same thing. As this is a management discussion thread, many vendors offer proprietary solutions for managing projects. For my example, if you need to collaborate with many stakeholders continuously, you need to consider licensing and access constraints every bit as much as the 'capability' a tool brings to the table. Maybe even more!

Important to enable the team to assess the appropriate steps to employ utilizing the tools available and to remember to evaluate progress and reassess when necessary.

Fantasizing about the day we all transition to using MBSE to have linked requirement models that are continuously up to date (except for those instantiations that are baselined into contractual requirements). Until then, I'd recommend building the best CM team you can and aggressively protecting your battle rhythm for recurring review boards. Your stakeholders and project members can't be given opportunity to bail out, or you will lose all control of providing timely updates.

Frequent updates are a necessary evil in a documentation life cycle. Being able to get feedback and provide fast updates is essential. One should operate under the assumption that mistakes will be made. Thus, having an efficient correction mechanism for content and deployment is a must.

Adopt an iterative approach to documentation. Start with high-level documentation and refine it as the project progresses and more details become available.

When it comes to Documentation, some simple steps that might come handy - 1. Start from basics and graduate to expert level. The person reading it might know nothing to everything about it. 2. Get the documentation reviewed by people from different walks. You will be surprised by the views. 3. Keep the language simple and avoid abbreviations. 4. Draw the talk, remember 'a picture speaks volumes'.

To determine the appropriate level of detail for project documentation, consider the project's complexity, the audience's needs, and stakeholder impact. Balance providing enough information without overwhelming the reader. Take into account the purpose of the documentation, audience preferences, and technical expertise. Feedback from stakeholders and team members can help refine the level of detail.

For small and less complex projects, concise documentation may be sufficient. Large and complex projects often require more detailed documentation to ensure comprehensive coverage. Assess the available resources, including time and manpower. If resources are limited, prioritize documentation that provides the most value and addresses critical aspects. Solicit feedback from stakeholders to ensure that the documentation meets their expectations and needs.

Balancing trade-offs in project documentation involves catering to diverse audience needs. Tailor detail and technicality based on the audience—provide specifics for technical teams and concise summaries for stakeholders. Strive for clarity without unnecessary length, employing logical organization with headings for easy navigation. Maintain consistency in terminology, formatting, and style. Ensure accessibility across different platforms and formats. Regularly update the documentation, considering the effort required for updates. Encourage feedback and revisions to align with project objectives. The ultimate goal is effective communication that serves the needs of all stakeholders.

Documentation shall be kept in documents directory with different folders as follows: 1. Feasibility report 2. Environmental clearance documents 3. Tender documents 4. Technical documents 5. Project management documents 6. Performance guarantee (PG test) documentation 7. Minimum 1 year successful continuous operation of the particular project 8. R&M for mitigating Future market needs.

Here are some other things to consider when thinking about project documentation. 1. Regulatory and Compliance Requirements: Certain industries or projects may have specific regulatory or compliance requirements. Ensure that documentation meets these standards to avoid legal or regulatory issues. 2. User Feedback and Iteration: Solicit feedback from end-users and stakeholders regarding documentation clarity and usefulness. Iteratively improve documentation based on user feedback. 3. Documentation Maintenance Plan: Establish a plan for ongoing maintenance of documentation. Regularly review and update the documentation to keep it aligned with the evolving project.

Tailor it to your audience and what you are trying to achieve. Different levels of management are looking at the project from different perspectives. If you are writing it for peers or direct supervision, you would add more detail for review and comments. For upper management, you add only the detail needed for them to make the appropriate decision/action, and state more detail is available upon request. Tell the story you need to tell and no more.

A key point is to ensure that any documentation requirements that involve extra costs and/or are time critical are agreed with a client up front. An example for metallic items would be 3.2 material certification. It can add cost/time, it is more achievable with some items than others and it's almost certainly going to be a problem if the request is picked up after production. Another issue would be the impact of any client approval cycles for key documents on overall project schedule. Both parties should have a clear comunication around and understanding of key requirements to avoid conflict later on. Assumptions can cause havoc with trying to get variation orders or manage angry clients (or both).

If you are lucky enough to find someone, not associated with the project, get them to read the documentation or at least skim it and comment. It could also be someone from the same group with appropriate skills but not directly associated with the project. There are also some key tests to apply to any such document. These are appropriate for both the Author(s) and reviewer(s) 1. Does it very briefly but clearly state the purpose of the document and the level of knowledge and familiarity needed to get value from it? 2. Does it clearly tell one how to start the hardware or program? 2.

While the requirements for any project documentations are driven by the organization/ contractual requirements from both user organization/ producer organizations to cover the various contract, management system, standards and regulatory requirements and continuously improved/modified....what it critical is how the end user uses these documentation content consciously for the contribution to the greater cause of the project goals.