Some big issues were:

- they were manually tracking the "versions" of documents by copy-pasting them in some folders - and even this was only done for each "release" of each document; inbetween two releases all the changes were made to files shared on Onedrive (possibly concurrently by two people, sometimes leading to conflicts with the loss of days of work) - at every release the changes since the last release had to be looked up manually every time and included in a document; this was very time consuming. - informations were duplicated in multiple documents, with no way to relate them; every change to one of them had to be manually replicated to the others.

I would argue that a correctly versioned document should not have these issue. A dedicated software should track all the changes, including individual ones inbetween releases. It should also provide a way to list them, possibly relative to some milestore (like the last release). Data should be kept in a format that's easy to automatically compare for changes, and hopefully in a deduplicated way so that changes need to be made only in one place. If that's not possible I would argue there should be a software that checks for inconsistent informations and prompts for them to be synchronized.

In the software development world this has mostly been solved by version control systems like git and continuous integration to ensure that the codebase is in a consistent state after every change.