I used to work in desktop support. One of our supervisors insisted that we have documentation on everything, even simple things like how to install a printer on a windows 95 workstation. The documentation had to include screen shots.

So rather than employ people who either new how to install printers on windows or could work it out (follow the prompts in the wizard) for themselves we employed people who would happily follow the step by step instructions in our documentation.

Everything fell apart when we migrated to Windows XP, where the instructions no longer worked, the screenshots were out of date and those support personnel who used to rely on all the documentation for step by step on how to install printers were left scratching their heads.

Documentation is great, but its main aim should be to detail the outcome required, why it's required and any unique situations that the reader should be aware of.

It is a bit like Kubernetes, you end up needing 3 chiefs and 12 workers to run something that a single one was doing before. Then you realize that anyway you can't reuse that process for something new you are trying to do and need another team of 3+12...

If they want to do that then why not run it like an assembly line? That’sa proven technology that allows you to create a complex output with minimal training of each employee. Both setups probably require a similar number of people but the assembly line would be less prone to failure since you wouldn’t have to maintain a byzantine codex of conflicting rules and procedures.

CE0 of BeauroDisruptor here. This is exactly the problem. We are building a hiring platform to connect organizations with top clerical telent using the latest in ML. Come and join us.