Skip to content
If They Are Not There Tomorrow

All notes · Leaving

The Handover Document

What a leaving person should write, what nobody reads, and the format that survives contact with a successor.

Leaving · Procedure

Most handover documents are long, written in the final week, and never opened. A shorter one written differently gets used.

Once the minimum record described in “The Handover Document” is defined, the practical challenge is keeping it current as work changes. A coordinator can use the original source to plan review time, compare the effort attached to recurring processes and identify work that still depends on one person, without confusing activity visibility with proof that the underlying knowledge has actually been transferred.

For an independent benchmark, compare the local approach with Atlassian knowledge-sharing guidance; the useful test is whether ownership, access and recovery remain proportionate and explainable when the usual expert is absent.

What it should contain

Current state: what is in flight, what stage each thing is at, what is waiting on whom.

Commitments: what has been promised to whom, by when, including verbal promises.

Contacts: who to ring at each client and supplier, and what to know about them.

Recurring obligations: what comes round weekly, monthly, annually, and when.

Exceptions and reasons: why things are done unusually, what has been tried and failed.

And access: what exists, though credentials themselves go through the proper route.

What it should not contain

Step-by-step procedures for anything a competent person can work out.

Background about the industry.

Anything already documented elsewhere — a pointer instead.

And an org chart, which somebody has.

Length

Five to eight pages for a substantial role.

Twenty pages does not get read and takes the notice period that should have been spent talking.

If it is running long, the excess is almost always procedure rather than the categories above.

When to write it

Progressively through the notice period, not in the final week.

Started on day two, added to as things come up.

A document written in the last three days reflects what the person remembered under pressure, which is not the same as what matters.

Who checks it

The receiver reads it in the second week and asks questions.

Those questions are the real handover, and they are only possible if the document exists while the person is still there.

A document delivered on the last day cannot be interrogated, which is why it is worth almost nothing.

The current-state section

The most valuable and the most perishable.

It should be updated in the final days, because in-flight work moves.

And it should be specific: "the Hargreaves quote is with them, chase on the 14th, Sarah is the contact and she has been slow" rather than "quotes outstanding".

Keeping it afterwards

It becomes the basis for the role's documentation.

The successor should edit it as they learn, rather than filing it.

A handover document that becomes a living note for the role is the best outcome available, and it costs nothing extra.

What to check

Does your handover template ask for current state and commitments, or for procedures?

Is the document started early enough to be questioned?

Is there a named receiver who will read it?

And what happened to the last one — is it still in use?

The point

A handover document delivered on the last day cannot be interrogated, which is why it is worth almost nothing.

Start it on day two.

Underlying all of this

Everything in this collection reduces to four habits: know where the dependence sits, do the cheap fixes first, use the absences that already happen as rehearsals, and decide deliberately about what remains. None of it requires a framework, a tool or a consultant, and an organisation that does those four things consistently is substantially harder to damage than one with a succession document nobody has read.

The recurring pattern

The recurring pattern across every section here is the same: dependence forms through sensible individual decisions, becomes invisible because it feels like reliability, and is addressed only after it has cost something. The work that prevents that is small, continuous and unglamorous, which is exactly why it gets deferred.

Independent guidance on key-person risk, knowledge transfer and practical continuity for small organisations. External tools are compared as operational support; ownership, rehearsal and human judgement remain essential.