Over a three-year international project, some of the people who signed the agreement will have moved on before it ends. That is normal, and it is the single strongest argument for writing things down as you go.
Anything that exists only in a shared memory disappears with the person who held it.
Documentation that survives turnover
- A decision log: what was decided, by whom, when, and why.
- A living protocol document, versioned.
- A contribution record updated as work happens.
- Contact list with at least two named people per institution.
- Data documentation written for someone who was not there.
Rhythm that works
- Short frequent check-ins rather than long quarterly reviews.
- One annual in-person meeting if budget allows.
- A written monthly summary from each side.
- An explicit mid-project review of whether the plan still makes sense.
Handling change
- When a key person leaves, hold a handover meeting with both sides present.
- Update the agreement if roles change materially.
- Re-confirm authorship expectations with any new participant.
- Do not assume the new person inherits the previous understanding.
When things go wrong
- Raise delays early; late disclosure damages trust more than the delay itself.
- Distinguish problems that need a plan change from those that need patience.
- If one side cannot deliver, renegotiate scope rather than let it drift.
- Silence about a problem is almost always worse than the problem.
Closing properly
- Confirm both sides hold complete data and documentation.
- Complete outstanding outputs before funding ends, not after.
- Agree who handles post-project queries and requests.
- Write down what you would do differently — you will collaborate again.
One thing worth remembering
Write documentation for someone who was not there.
That is who will read it: a new staff member two years in, or your own future self after eighteen months on other work. Notes that assume shared context are notes that will need to be reconstructed by asking someone who has left.
Câu hỏi thường gặp
Why does documentation matter so much over three years?
Because some people who signed the agreement will have moved on before it ends, and anything held only in shared memory disappears with the person who held it.
What documentation survives turnover?
A decision log with what was decided by whom and why, a versioned living protocol, a contribution record updated as work happens, two named contacts per institution, and data documentation.
What management rhythm works?
Short frequent check-ins rather than long quarterly reviews, one annual in-person meeting if budget allows, written monthly summaries from each side, and an explicit mid-project review.
How should staff change be handled?
Hold a handover meeting with both sides present, update the agreement if roles change materially, re-confirm authorship with any new participant, and never assume they inherit the previous understanding.
Who should documentation be written for?
Someone who was not there — a new staff member two years in, or your own future self after eighteen months on other work.
