Working with External Collaborators
External collaborators — partners, consultants, government counterparts — use Word and Google Docs. They will continue to do so. The platform does not require them to change tools. This guide explains how their work connects to the platform.
1. The Collaboration Model
The platform separates collaboration from production:
- Google Docs (or Word) is where you co-edit with external partners — comments, suggestions, tracked changes, real-time editing.
- The platform is where content goes for production — formatting, branding, multi-format output, access control, and distribution.
This split exists because external collaborators cannot access the platform directly, and live co-editing within the platform is not yet supported. Google Docs handles what it does well (real-time collaboration); the platform handles what it does well (production and distribution). The two work together.
2. Scenario: Co-Authoring with an External Partner
You are writing a research report with a partner organisation. They need to comment, suggest changes, and contribute sections.
- Start in Google Docs. Create or share the document as you normally would. Collaborate with comments, suggestions, and edits.
- When content is ready for production, open Claude Co-Work and give it the content. You can paste the text directly or share the document.
“Here is the draft research report from the water security project. Convert it to markdown and submit it for review. The project is water-security, visibility is internal for now.”
- Claude converts the content to markdown, cleans up formatting, and submits it to the platform.
- Review on the internal site. Check the rendered output — web page, PDF, DOCX. Request any corrections through Claude Co-Work.
- Approve. The platform generates branded outputs and publishes to the appropriate sites.
If the external partner sends further revisions in Google Docs, repeat the process. Claude handles the conversion each time.
3. Scenario: Receiving Feedback on a Published Document
You have published a report through the platform and need an external partner to review it.
- Download the branded DOCX from the internal site.
- Email it to the partner. They receive a publication-quality Word document with CSDR branding.
- The partner reviews in Word — tracked changes, comments, margin notes.
- They return the marked-up file. Open Claude Co-Work:
“Here is the marked-up Word file from our partner on the water security report. Convert their tracked changes back to the platform and show me what they changed.”
- Claude converts the changes, presents a summary of what was altered, and submits the updated content for your review.
- Review and approve on the internal site.
4. Scenario: Submitting in Another Organisation’s Template
A funder or government agency requires submissions in their specific Word template.
- Give Claude the template and your content:
“Here is DFAT’s submission template. Produce a DOCX using this template with the content from our Pacific resilience assessment. Match their heading structure and formatting requirements.”
- Claude produces a formatted DOCX in the external organisation’s template, ready to submit.
- Review the output and make any adjustments before sending.
The source content remains in the platform. The template-formatted DOCX is a distribution artefact — a copy produced for a specific purpose.
5. Word-to-Markdown Reliability
Claude’s conversion between Word and markdown is reliable for standard documents:
| Converts cleanly | May need manual review |
|---|---|
| Body text and paragraphs | Nested tables (tables within tables) |
| Headings (all levels) | Unusual page layouts |
| Simple tables | Complex form fields |
| Bullet and numbered lists | Embedded macros or ActiveX controls |
| Bold, italic, and other inline formatting | Custom XML structures |
| Tracked changes and comments | Documents with heavy use of text boxes |
| Footnotes and endnotes | |
| Hyperlinks |
For the vast majority of Centre documents — research reports, policy briefs, meeting notes, assessments — conversion is straightforward. Edge cases with complex formatting are rare and flagged during review.
6. What About Google Docs API Integration?
Automated syncing between Google Docs and the platform is not currently in place. This is a roadmap consideration — the API exists and integration is technically feasible, but it has not been prioritised over other platform work.
For now, the workflow is manual but fast: copy content from Google Docs, give it to Claude, Claude converts and submits. This takes minutes, not hours.
7. Multiple Word Versions
The reality of external collaboration is that multiple Word versions of a document will circulate between partners, especially when several organisations are involved. This is unavoidable.
Two things help:
- Google Docs reduces version proliferation. When possible, collaborate in Google Docs rather than emailing Word files. Everyone works on the same document, and the version history is automatic.
- The platform is the single source of truth. Whatever happens in Google Docs or Word, the production version lives in the platform. When collaboration is complete, the final content enters the platform and that becomes the authoritative version. Previous Word drafts become historical artefacts, not competing sources.
If you receive multiple Word versions from different partners, give them all to Claude:
“Here are three versions of the water security report from different reviewers. Consolidate the changes and show me what each reviewer contributed.”
Claude reconciles the changes and presents a unified view for your review.