A shared document may exist in multiple copies with different edits. If it is not clear which one is valid for the job, different people can apply incompatible instructions. The issue concerns the update path, in addition to the file name.
I propose to identify a reference point, a manager and the criterion by which a review is made available. Version number or date help, as long as they have a shared meaning. Past copies must be recognizable and managed according to conservation needs.
A hypothetical example is a list sent by email and then modified in the common folder. Those using the previous Annex may continue to propose out-of-date conditions. A link to the reference version can reduce the problem, if accessibility and permissions are correct.
The revision should describe the important changes for those who use the document. A silent update may be insufficient when editing daily work. I also propose to verify models and automatisms that incorporate the previous content. Version management works when it allows you to know which text to use today and to reconstruct, when needed, the information available in a past moment.