Introduction

Organisations must efficiently manage and prioritise their documentation to align with strategic goals and regulatory requirements. This guide provides a comprehensive framework for the weighting and evaluation of business documents. By following a structured process, organisations can ensure that their most critical documents receive the attention they deserve, supporting informed decision-making and compliance with industry standards.

The following sections outline the criteria for document importance, methods for rating and weighting documents, and steps for calculating and normalising scores. This approach helps organisations prioritise their documentation efforts, ensuring that resources are allocated effectively to support overall business objectives.

Document weighting

This outlines the process for determining the importance of business documents within your organisation. We follow these steps to ensure a structured and comprehensive approach to document prioritisation.

This image is an example of the weightings applied to a document.

Step 1: Establish Criteria for Importance

Define the criteria that will determine the importance of each strategic document. These criteria include:

• Alignment with Organisational Goals: Evaluate how well each document supports the core objectives of the organisation.

• Impact on Decision Making: Assess the influence of each document on key business decisions.

• Scope of Influence: Determine whether the document impacts the entire organisation or specific departments.

• Compliance & Regulatory Requirements: Identify documents required for legal or regulatory adherence.

• Stakeholder Interest: Gauge the importance of documents to key stakeholders, including investors, management, and employees.

Step 2: Rate Each Document Against the Criteria

For automatic weighting, we use a scoring model where each criterion is rated on a predefined scale (e.g., 1-5). For manual validation, you can involve stakeholders in scoring each document against these criteria through surveys or workshops and adjust their weightings.

• Example Scale:

  • 1: Very Low

  • 2: Low

  • 3: Medium

  • 4: High

  • 5: Very High

Step 3: Assign Weights to Each Criterion

Not all criteria will hold the same level of importance. Assign weights to each criterion based on its relative importance to the organisation’s strategy. This is done through stakeholder input, strategic alignment workshops, or expert judgment.

• Defined Weights:

• You can update document weighting standards in Settings > Documents

  • Alignment with Organisational Goals: 30%

  • Impact on Decision Making: 25%

  • Scope of Influence: 20%

  • Compliance and Regulatory Requirements: 15%

  • Stakeholder Interest: 10%

Step 4: Calculate Weighted Scores

We then multiply the scores from Step 2 by the weights assigned in Step 3 for each document. Sum these to get a total weighted score for each document.

• Calculation Example:

  • If a document scores 5 for Alignment, 4 for Impact, 3 for Scope, 2 for Compliance, and 1 for Stakeholder Interest:

    • Weighted Score = (50.30) + (40.25) + (30.20) + (20.15) + (1*0.10)

    • Weighted Score = 1.50 + 1.00 + 0.60 + 0.30 + 0.10 = 3.50

Step 5: Normalise the Scores

To compare the importance across documents, we normalise the scores so that they are relative to each other. This can be done by dividing each document’s score by the highest score or by summing all scores and dividing each by the total.

• Normalisation Example:

  • If the highest score is 4.85, then normalised score for a document with a score of 3.50 is:

    • Normalised Score = 3.50 / 4.85 ≈ 0.72

Step 6: Rank the Documents

We then rank the documents based on the normalised scores to determine their relative importance. This ranking can guide how resources, attention, and efforts are allocated among the strategic documents.

Example of a Weighting Table (Hypothetical)

Document criteria analysis

To evaluate business architecture data effectively, business users follow a structured rating process for each Business Architecture domain within their document. The process involves assessing three key aspects: relevance, quality, and quantity.

1. Relevance: Users determine how closely the domain data aligns with the organisation's strategic goals. Ratings range from "Very High" (direct alignment) to "Very Low" (minimal support), with an option for "Incomplete" if no relevant data exists.

2. Quality: This assesses the documentation's adherence to industry standards, specifically ISO 9001 for documents. Ratings span from "Very High" (meets/exceeds Level 5 standards) to "Very Low" (meets Level 1 standards), with "Incomplete" indicating non-compliance with any standard.

3. Quantity: Users evaluate the comprehensiveness of the documentation against ISO 9001 for documents requirements. The scale goes from "Very High" (surpassing Level 5 requirements) to "Very Low" (meeting Level 1 requirements), with "Incomplete" for insufficient documentation.

By systematically rating each domain, users ensure a thorough and objective evaluation of how well their business architecture data supports strategic goals and meets documentation standards. This structured approach helps in identifying strengths and areas for improvement, ultimately aiding in more informed decision-making.

Steps to Assess Document Quality in Terms of ISO 9001

Review Structure and Content

1. Quality Manual: Does the document include a quality manual that outlines the scope of the QMS, including any exclusions?

2. Quality Policy and Objectives: Are the organisation's quality policy and objectives clearly stated?

3. Procedures and Work Instructions: Are there documented procedures and detailed work instructions that ensure process consistency?

Control of Documented Information

1. Approval: Check if the document has been approved for adequacy prior to use.

   • Review and Update: Look for evidence of regular reviews and updates, including re-approval if necessary.

   • Identification and Distribution: Ensure that the document is clearly identified and distributed to relevant personnel.

Accessibility and Storage

1. Accessibility: Confirm that relevant personnel have easy access to the document.

   • Storage and Protection: Verify that the document is stored and protected to prevent damage or loss.

Retention and Disposal

1. Retention: Check that documents are retained for the required period.

   • Disposal: Ensure there are procedures for the disposal of documents when no longer needed.

Accuracy and Currency

1. Accuracy: Assess if the document is accurate and reflects the current state of the QMS.

   • Currency: Check if the document is up-to-date and includes any recent changes or updates.

Compliance

1. Regulatory Requirements: Ensure the document complies with relevant regulatory and statutory requirements.

Example Assessment Criteria

Structure and Content

• Quality Manual: Included and comprehensive (Yes/No)

• Quality Policy and Objectives: Clearly stated (Yes/No)

• Procedures and Work Instructions: Detailed and complete (Yes/No)

Control of Documented Information

• Approval: Document approved for use (Yes/No)

• Review and Update: Regularly reviewed and updated (Yes/No)

• Identification and Distribution: Clearly identified and appropriately distributed (Yes/No)

Accessibility and Storage

• Accessibility: Easily accessible to relevant personnel (Yes/No)

• Storage and Protection: Properly stored and protected (Yes/No)

Retention and Disposal

• Retention: Retained for required period (Yes/No)

• Disposal: Proper disposal procedures in place (Yes/No)

Accuracy and Currency

• Accuracy: Accurate and error-free (Yes/No)

• Currency: Up-to-date with recent changes (Yes/No)

Compliance

• Regulatory Requirements: Compliant with relevant regulations (Yes/No)

Next Steps

If you provide the document, I can conduct this assessment using the criteria above and give you a detailed evaluation of how it rates in terms of ISO 9001 standards.