The reason most organisations eventually buy policy and procedures software is not storage, it is evidence. Somebody asks whether staff knew about a rule, and the honest answer is that it was emailed once. Publishing is not communicating, and an email is not evidence. This page sets out what an attestation has to record to be worth anything, and why asking fewer people to read is what makes the record credible.
What an attestation has to record
Who, which version, and when. Two of those three are frequently missing. Recording that a person acknowledged a policy without recording which version they saw produces a report that looks complete and answers nothing once the document has changed twice, which most useful documents do.
Why fewer readers make a better record
Scoping each procedure to the people it applies to takes the worked example from 2,880 signatures to 1,152, and $6,566.40 of reading time rather than well over $16,000. It also makes each signature mean something, because a person who is only sent what concerns them has no habit of clicking through.
What happens when a document changes
Everyone who signed the old version needs to be asked again, and the register should say who that is without anybody assembling a list. If it does not, the practical consequence is that documents stop being updated: the cost of a revision becomes an administrative project rather than a five-minute change.
The honest limit of any attestation
A signature proves somebody was asked and clicked. It does not prove comprehension, and any vendor implying otherwise is overselling. What it does is convert an argument about whether somebody was told into a fact, which is usually the argument that matters.
Questions people ask about policy and procedures software
What must an attestation record?
Who, which version and when. A signature against the document rather than the version is unusable after two revisions.
Does an attestation prove someone understood the policy?
No, and nobody should claim it does. It proves they were asked and clicked, which converts an argument into a fact.
Why does scoping improve the evidence?
It takes the worked example from 2,880 signatures to 1,152, and a person sent only what concerns them has no habit of clicking through.