Our approach
We make responsibilities, assumptions, and review points clear before work moves forward.
From request to reviewed response
A shared workspace. An external adviser. One access decision that needs a closer look.
Illustrative workflow using fictional information. No live request is sent.
Request recorded
“We need a shared place to review project documents with an external adviser.”
Request recorded
The project lead confirms an internal working area and an external adviser who only needs to review selected material.
Context confirmed
The draft identifies a workspace owner and contributors. Its suggestion that the external adviser can edit is still an assumption.
Draft · not approved
The reviewer removes the adviser’s proposed editing access. The stated need was to review selected material, not change working files.
Reviewed proposal
The project lead accepts the reviewed plan. The implementation owner will validate sharing with test accounts before any live release.
Handover recorded
“We need a shared place to review project documents with an external adviser.”
System responsibility: Record the source and keep the original request intact. Free-form text is input, not an instruction to change a system.
Human decision: Who needs to work here, and what information will they handle?
The project lead confirms an internal working area and an external adviser who only needs to review selected material.
System responsibility: Record access needs and sensitivity before preparing a proposal. If either is missing, return for clarification.
Human decision: Is there enough context to propose an access boundary?
The draft identifies a workspace owner and contributors. Its suggestion that the external adviser can edit is still an assumption.
System responsibility: Separate confirmed requirements from proposed settings. A draft does not authorize implementation.
Human decision: Does the proposed access match the stated need?
The reviewer removes the adviser’s proposed editing access. The stated need was to review selected material, not change working files.
System responsibility: Retain the original proposal and its correction. Approval is limited to the reviewed scope.
Human decision: Can we explain and approve this access boundary?
The project lead accepts the reviewed plan. The implementation owner will validate sharing with test accounts before any live release.
System responsibility: Record the decision, owner, and acceptance check. This example sends nothing and changes no live environment.
Human decision: Who implements the plan, and how will access be checked?
If information is missing, the request returns for clarification before a recommendation is prepared.