PLAINREADS — PROJECT BRIEF
Guide: https://plainreads.com/blog/project-brief-template

Copy this document into your shared workspace. Replace the prompts with agreed
answers. Mark unknowns explicitly and assign someone to resolve them.

1. PROBLEM AND AUDIENCE
What is happening now? Who is affected? What evidence can everyone inspect?

2. OUTCOME
What should the audience be able to do when the work is complete?

3. DELIVERABLE AND SCOPE
What will the team produce? What is explicitly excluded?

4. ACCEPTANCE
Who accepts the work? What observable checks determine completion?

5. OWNERS AND DECISIONS
Who coordinates delivery? Who contributes? Who resolves scope conflicts?

6. TIMING, DEPENDENCIES, AND OPEN QUESTIONS
What date matters, and why? Which inputs or approvals must arrive first?
For each unknown: question / person resolving it / decision needed by.

7. AGREEMENT AND CHANGE RECORD
Version / agreement date / participants confirming / current forecast.
For a change: request / impact on scope and timing / decision / decision owner.

COMPLETED FICTIONAL EXAMPLE
Problem: New employees cannot identify the current expense instructions among
several links in the welcome message.
Outcome: New employees can find approved submission steps and the help contact.
Deliverable: One shared FAQ answering six agreed questions and an updated
welcome-message link.
Scope: Explain existing policy and answer the agreed recurring questions.
Excluded: Changing reimbursement rules or selecting an expense platform.
Acceptance: Policy owner approves wording; every link works; the FAQ answers
the agreed questions and names the correct help contact.
Owner: Morgan coordinates drafting. Casey, the operations lead, approves policy
wording and confirms who will maintain the document.
Timing: Proposed two-week window, subject to Casey confirming a review slot;
publish before the next cohort receives its welcome message.
Dependency: Casey identifies the authoritative policy before drafting starts.
Open question: Two competing travel-policy links exist. Casey confirms the
authoritative version before Morgan drafts that answer.
Change rule: Additional questions require a scope and timing check before acceptance.

FINAL CHECK
Can each participant explain the same outcome and boundaries?
Does the acceptance check describe a result rather than effort?
Have required owners agreed? Are unresolved questions visible?
Have you distinguished a requested date from an agreed commitment?

The example is original and fictional. Its timing is illustrative, not a benchmark.