# The Stack You Hand Over *Published 2026-10-22* | Author: brad-webb > **tl;dr** Don't write a handover doc. It's what you remember, written the week you're busiest, and the new person spends two weeks asking what it left out. Ask one question of every task instead: could someone run this from the record alone? The record is what the work already leaves behind: your task list, your rules (when this happens, do that), and a line for every run. The yes lines are handed over already. The no lines are this week's writing. Part 4 of 4 of The Growth Team of One, and the last. *Part 1, [The Job Nobody Wrote Down](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/the-job-nobody-wrote-down), wrote the job down; part 2, [The Work You Stop Doing](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/the-work-you-stop-doing), decided what to stop; part 3, [The Work That Runs Without You](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/the-work-that-runs-without-you), handed the small customer lines to rules; this part hands over the rest.* The second name goes on the chart on a Monday. Sometimes it's hire number two. Sometimes it's your successor, and you're the one moving on. Either way, someone has to learn the job by Friday, and until now the job has lived in exactly one place. The instinct is a handover doc. You open a blank page the week before they start and try to write down everything you do. It's the wrong artifact. It's a snapshot of what you remember, which isn't the same as what you do. And you write it the week you're busiest, because the week before a handover is always the week you're busiest. It's out of date by Friday, and nobody reads it twice. I know because I wrote one. The last time I handed a job over, I spent the final week on a doc with a table of contents and a section called "Things I'd forget." The person taking over read it once, politely, and then spent two weeks asking me questions it didn't answer. Most of the answers were sitting somewhere I'd never thought to point: the CRM's history, my sent folder, a notes field nobody else opened. I'd handed over a description of the job. The job's own record stayed behind. This series has been building the other artifact all along. Not a doc about the job. The job, written down as it runs. ## What the series already wrote Put the first three parts side by side and look at what's already on the table. **The inventory.** Part 1 wrote the job down by recurrence: what happens every day, every week, and every time something specific occurs. One line per task, with what triggers it and who'd notice if it stopped. That's a job description written while the job was being done, which is the only kind that stays accurate. **The stop list.** Part 2 crossed out the lines nobody would miss and circled the ones a customer would notice by lunch. That's the part of a handover nobody writes: what you deliberately don't do, and why. **The rules.** Part 3 handed the circled lines to rules. A rule you set once: when this happens, do that. Bryn is the agent we built at Civic to spot buyers on your site and run the follow-up you approved. Bryn calls that kind of rule a Play, and I'll keep the plain word here. The "when" is a signal: something a buyer just did, like coming back to your pricing page. Some rules draft the step and wait for a person to approve it. Each rule sits on a rung, set by what one wrong run would cost: it runs on its own, it runs after my yes, or it stays mine. Bryn calls the middle rung Approve mode. **The runs.** Every time a rule fires, it leaves a line: what fired, what it did, from whom, and who said yes. That's the part no handover doc has ever had. It's the job, being done, with a time on every step. Put together, that's the onboarding doc. Nobody wrote it for the handover, which is the point. It was written by doing the work, so it's still accurate on Friday. I made the same argument about marketing materials on Monday, in [Built, Not Generated](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/built-not-generated): the speed comes from the record. A handover is the same job with a person at the end of it. ## The handover test Here's the test. It's one question, asked of every line on the chart: could someone run this from the record alone? Not "could someone smart work it out." From the record alone, without calling you. If yes, the line is handed over already, whether or not anyone has started. If no, the line lives in your head, and that's what you write down this week, before anyone arrives. Run it on what survived part 2, plus the judgment calls that were always yours. The rule lines pass without effort. A rule in four fields is already a description someone else can read: when this happens, do this, from this owner, write it down. The runs beside it show what it did last week. Those lines were written to be read. The by-hand lines split. The weekly email passes, because the template is the instructions. The CRM cleanup usually doesn't. What counts as a duplicate, which owner wins when two people touched an account, which stage means what: that's a set of habits you've never had to say out loud. Attribution is the same. These are the lines you'd explain over someone's shoulder, and over someone's shoulder isn't a record. The judgment lines fail, and they should. Quoting a price that isn't on the list can't run from a record, because the record would have to contain you. Leave those as no's. They get handed over differently, and I'll come to that. THE HANDOVER TEST (interactive: every line left on the chart after part 2, plus the judgment calls that were always yours; for each, one question: could someone run this from the record alone?) HANDED OVER ALREADY (yes: someone could run it from the record alone): - Check ad spend and pacing (Demand), by hand - Build the outbound list (Demand), by hand - Scan new signups and trials (Lifecycle), by hand - Send the weekly email (Lifecycle), by hand - Follow up when a trial starts (Lifecycle), rule - Triage form fills and the inbound inbox (Sales assist), rule - Notice when a known account comes back to pricing (Sales assist), rule - Send the case study sales asked for (Sales assist), rule - Update the CRM and case study list when a deal closes (Ops and data), by hand - Find out when an integration breaks (Tools), rule TO WRITE DOWN THIS WEEK (no: it lives in your head): - Clean up the CRM (duplicates, owners, stages) (Ops and data), by hand - Fix attribution and the broken UTMs (Ops and data), by hand - Quote a price not on the list (Head of growth), stays mine - Decide whether to chase a quiet deal (Head of growth), stays mine - Talk to the customer about to leave (Head of growth), stays mine Handed over already: 10. To write down this week: 5. The yes and no defaults are illustrative, one possible read. Yours will differ. Figure 1. The handover test, one question for every line left on the chart. The yes lines are handed over already; the no's are this week's writing. Illustrative defaults. Look at where the by-hand no's land: in the boxes you're about to hand to someone else. That's not bad luck. It's why you're hiring. For each by-hand no, write down the calls you make in the middle, the part you'd otherwise say over their shoulder. Not the steps; they'll see the steps. The calls. It's usually half a page, and it's the only writing this handover needs. ## Two names on the chart Now draw the chart again, with two names on it. On the figures the new person is Sam, a placeholder. Every box that survived part 2 goes one of three ways. It goes to the new person. It stays yours. Or it stays with its rule, right where part 3 put it. Most handover conversations only have the first two options, which is why they turn into a negotiation about who does what. The third option is the one that makes the conversation short, because a box on a rule doesn't need a person to run it. It needs a person to say yes. That's the part that's easy to miss. A rule on the runs-after-my-yes rung has a yes-sayer, and while there was one name on the chart, that was me. The rule doesn't change when a second name arrives, but who approves it might. Make that decision on purpose: name who approves from the first day, and make the change where the rule lives, so the record shows it with a date. The version to avoid is a rule that keeps drafting for a yes-sayer who's moved on. The draft waits, politely, and the customer it was for hears nothing. My split, for the chart this series has been drawing: Demand and Ops and data go to the new person, since that's where the work done by hand still lives. Lifecycle and Sales assist stay with their rules, and the new person becomes their yes-sayer. The head box, the judgment, stays mine for now. Move them around. If every box ends up with the new name, you're not hiring a second person. You're drawing your successor's chart, which is a fine thing to do on purpose. TWO NAMES ON THE CHART (interactive: the four boxes that survived part 2; give each one to the new person, keep it, or leave it with its rule; Sam is a placeholder for the second name) HEAD OF GROWTH: YOU. The judgment lines stay with you for now and get handed over in person. DEMAND (site, pixel, paid; outbound, partners): goes to Sam, the new hire. LIFECYCLE (trial follow-up; email, newsletter): stays with its rule. Follow up when a trial starts runs after my yes. Names a new yes-sayer. SALES ASSIST (one-pagers; demo prep, calls): stays with its rules. Triage form fills and the inbound inbox, and Send the case study sales asked for, run after my yes; Notice when a known account comes back to pricing runs on its own. Names a new yes-sayer. OPS AND DATA (CRM hygiene; data plumbing): goes to Sam, the new hire. The two no's from Figure 1 get written down first. Sam: 2 boxes. Stays mine: 0 boxes. On a rule: 2 boxes, each with a new yes-sayer to name. The split is illustrative, one possible read. Reporting and Tools were struck in part 2; the one Tools line still running, the integration alarm, runs on its own and needs no yes-sayer. Figure 2. Two names on the chart. Each kept box goes to the new person, stays yours, or stays with its rule, and a rule that waits for a yes names a new yes-sayer. Illustrative split; Sam is a placeholder. ## The first week, from the log Then give the new person a reading order, not a doc. **Monday: the rules.** Every rule on the chart, in four fields. It takes an hour, not a day, which is the first surprise. **Tuesday: a week of runs.** What fired, what each rule did, from whom, and who said yes. It's the job at the speed it's actually done, and it answers what a doc can't: how often the trial check-in really goes out, and what it says. **Wednesday: the edited runs.** These are the useful ones. Each is a run where a person changed the draft before saying yes, and each shows a rule written too loose that then got tighter. Reading the edits is reading the judgment that went into the rules, in the order it went in. It's the closest thing to reading my mind, and better, because it's dated. **Thursday: their first yes.** A rule on the after-my-yes rung drafts a step, and the new person approves it. It goes on the record with their name on it. That's the moment the box changes hands, and it's a line in a log, not a feeling. **Friday: their first edit.** They change a rule, usually by tightening the "when," and the edit is on the record too. Now the record holds their judgment as well as mine. THE FIRST WEEK, FROM THE LOG (interactive: Monday to Friday, the new person reads a different part of the record each day; step through the week) MONDAY, THE RULES. Sam reads every rule on the chart, in four fields. An hour, not a day. - rule ⬩ follow up when a trial goes quiet ⬩ when: trial goes quiet 3 days ⬩ do: send the check-in ⬩ from: the account owner ⬩ rung: runs after my yes - rule ⬩ notice when a known account comes back to pricing ⬩ when: pricing page, third visit this week ⬩ do: post to the deal channel ⬩ from: me ⬩ rung: runs on its own TUESDAY, A WEEK OF RUNS. Sam reads last week's runs: what fired, what each rule did, from whom, and who said yes. - run 01 ⬩ Mon 09:41 ⬩ fired: trial quiet 3 days (account A) ⬩ drafted: check-in from the account owner ⬩ decision: yes - run 02 ⬩ Tue 10:14 ⬩ fired: trial quiet 3 days (account B) ⬩ drafted: check-in from the account owner ⬩ decision: yes - run 06 ⬩ Tue 11:30 ⬩ fired: pricing page, third visit this week (account F) ⬩ did: posted to the deal channel ⬩ ran on its own WEDNESDAY, THE EDITED RUNS. Sam reads the runs a person changed before saying yes. Each shows a rule that was too loose, and the edit that tightened it. - run 03 ⬩ Wed 15:52 ⬩ fired: trial quiet 3 days (account C, open deal) ⬩ drafted: check-in from the account owner ⬩ decision: edited - note: this showed me the rule was too loose: added the suppression for open deals - rule edit ⬩ Wed 16:05 ⬩ follow up when a trial goes quiet ⬩ added: skip accounts with an open deal ⬩ by: me THURSDAY, THEIR FIRST YES. The approver changes on the record, then Sam says yes to a drafted check-in. The box changes hands in a log line. - change ⬩ Thu 09:00 ⬩ follow up when a trial goes quiet ⬩ approver: Sam (was: me) - run 14 ⬩ Thu 10:14 ⬩ fired: trial quiet 3 days (account K) ⬩ drafted: check-in from the account owner ⬩ decision: yes, Sam FRIDAY, THEIR FIRST EDIT. Sam tightens a rule. The edit is on the record, so the record now holds Sam's judgment as well as mine. - rule edit ⬩ Fri 11:30 ⬩ notice when a known account comes back to pricing ⬩ added: skip current customers ⬩ by: Sam - run 18 ⬩ Fri 14:48 ⬩ fired: pricing page, third visit this week (account M) ⬩ did: posted to the deal channel ⬩ ran on its own, as Sam edited it Illustrative record lines, clock times and accounts. Sam is a placeholder. Figure 3. The first week, from the log: Monday the rules, Tuesday a week of runs, Wednesday the edited runs, Thursday the first yes, Friday the first edit. Illustrative record lines; Sam is a placeholder. Nothing they learn that week lives only in a conversation with me. That's the check on the reading order. If a question comes up that the record can't answer, it's a no from the handover test that I missed, and it goes on this week's list. ## What doesn't transfer Not everything belongs in the record, and pretending otherwise is how handover docs get long. The stays-mine lines don't transfer by reading. The price that isn't on the list. Whether to chase the deal that went quiet. The conversation with the customer who's about to leave. That's judgment, and judgment transfers by doing it next to someone a few times, until they disagree with you and turn out to be right. The people don't transfer by reading either. The partner who wants a call, not an email. The customer who answers on Thursdays and never on Mondays. The founder's particular way of asking for a number. Those are relationships, and you hand them over in person: an introduction, a call you both sit in on, a thread you forward with one line on top. What the record does for these is smaller than it sounds, and more useful: it tells the new person which lines they are. So the in-person handover is short and specific. A few judgment calls, a handful of introductions, some time sitting next to each other. Not two weeks of answering questions the record could have answered. ## What the record keeps Bryn is the product we make for this, and we ran it on ourselves first; [We Are Customer Zero](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/we-are-customer-zero) tells that story. The parts of this piece that lean on a record are the parts it keeps. Every run is logged: what fired, what it did, from whom, and who said yes. Rules can change hands, and the change is on the record, because an edit to a rule lands in the log like any other change; [Your Rules, Readable](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/your-rules-readable) walks through what an edit does. The new person's first yes happens in [Approve mode](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/approve-mode-is-not-a-speed-bump), where Bryn drafts the step and waits for a yes, and the record line gains one field: who clicked, and when. Any rule stops with one click. If you'd like one rule taken apart, [Anatomy of a Play](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/anatomy-of-a-play) does it in a page. Bryn is not another dashboard to watch. It is the governed execution layer that runs Plays through your stack. In plain terms: it runs the rules you wrote, through the tools you already use, and the record it keeps is the onboarding doc nobody had to write. ## The gift Do this before anyone arrives. This week is fine. Take your chart, with every line from parts 1 to 3. No chart yet? List what you did last week, one line per task. Ask each line one question: could someone run this from the record alone? Write yes or no beside it. For every by-hand no, write down the calls you make in the middle, the part you'd otherwise say over someone's shoulder. Half a page at most. For every judgment no, write one sentence: this one's mine for now, and here's how we'll hand it over. For every rule that runs after a yes, name who says yes from the first day, and make the change where the rule lives. Then give the new person a reading order, not a doc. The rules. A week of runs. The edited runs. Their first yes. Their first edit. ## The series, complete Here's the chart one last time, drawn once per part. THE SAME CHART, DRAWN ONCE PER PART (static, illustrative) Write it down, stop what nobody would miss, hand the small lines to rules, hand the rest over. 01 INVENTORY. Part 1 of 4, The Job Nobody Wrote Down: every box reads YOU. 02 SUBTRACT. Part 2 of 4, The Work You Stop Doing: Reporting and Tools struck. 03 DELEGATE. Part 3 of 4, The Work That Runs Without You: Lifecycle and Sales assist on a RULE; Reporting and Tools stay struck. 04 HAND OFF (this part). Part 4 of 4, The Stack You Hand Over: the head box still reads YOU; Demand and Ops and data read SAM; Lifecycle and Sales assist keep their RULE chips; Reporting and Tools stay struck. Illustrative: the second name is a placeholder. Figure 4. The same chart, drawn once per part: inventory, subtract, delegate, hand off. Illustrative; the second name is a placeholder. Part 1, [The Job Nobody Wrote Down](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/the-job-nobody-wrote-down): write the job down by recurrence, and tag every line. Part 2, [The Work You Stop Doing](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/the-work-you-stop-doing): stop what nobody would miss, and never stop what a customer would notice by lunch. Part 3, [The Work That Runs Without You](https://www.civic.com/field-notes/the-work-that-runs-without-you): hand the small customer lines to rules, each on the rung its wrong run can afford. Part 4, The Stack You Hand Over: run the handover test, put a second name on the chart, and let the record be the onboarding doc. That's the whole series. A growth team of one is one person and a job nobody wrote down. Write it down, and nearly every line can be stopped, handed to a rule, or handed to someone else. The lines that can't are the ones in the head box, and by now you know exactly which they are. *Part 4 of 4 of The Growth Team of One. The series is complete.* **Stop watching signals. Start running them.** Source: https://www.civic.com/field-notes/the-stack-you-hand-over