The brief lives in one place, questions happen in another, and revision notes in a third. Staff open the wrong version. The coordinator answers the same clarifying question twice.
Each round starts from scratch because context doesn't travel with the task. Last week's decisions sit in a buried thread. This week's delivery misses a constraint nobody remembered to paste forward.
Staff see the original brief and any added context at every stage.
Loop back for more info without leaving the map. Pick up where you left off.
Evaluation notes travel with the task, not in a separate thread.
Staff always have the full brief and any added context in front of them. Clarification happens inside the map, not in a parallel thread. Revision feedback travels with the task so each round builds on the last instead of starting from scratch.
Coordinator — Writes the task brief and assigns the work.
Staff — Reviews the brief and determines whether enough information has been provided.
Staff — If anything is unclear, requests additional context. Once everything is clear, completes and submits the task.
Coordinator — Reviews the submission and either approves it or requests revisions until it meets expectations.
Coordinator — Tracks completed tasks on the shared sheet. Once approved, everyone involved is notified that the work has been completed.
Briefs, supplies context, evaluates, approves or sends back
Reviews brief, asks questions, delivers, iterates on revision
Brief, clarify, deliver, approve — on one map. The brief doesn't live in a doc, the questions in a chat, and the revision notes in a third place. When the round comes back, the context is still attached to the task, so nobody has to reconstruct last week's conversation from memory.
For coordinators who delegate work and need the brief, questions, and approvals in one place:
Open this map when you are briefing a task and context usually splits across tools.
