This statement is true. There is a recognized continuum of work processes ranging from highly repetitive and procedural to highly creative and heuristic. On the procedural end of the spectrum (e.g., manufacturing assembly, data entry), the work is standardized and controlled through detailed, explicit written procedures to ensure consistency and minimize variation. The reliance on individual skill is focused on following these procedures accurately.

As work processes move towards the creative end of the spectrum (e.g., software architecture design, research and development, strategic planning), the reliance on rigid, step-by-step written procedures diminishes significantly. Such processes depend heavily on the knowledge, experience, judgment, and collaborative skills of the people involved. While high-level frameworks or guidelines may exist, the core value is generated through human intellect and creativity, not by adherence to a detailed script. Therefore, the "mix" of required inputs shifts from a high dependency on written procedures to a high dependency on people skills.

The alternative, "False," is incorrect because it would imply that the balance between written procedures and people skills remains static regardless of the nature of the work. This contradicts fundamental principles of process management and quality control. Applying a highly procedural, documentation-heavy approach to a creative process would stifle innovation, while applying a skill-dependent, low-documentation approach to a repetitive process would lead to inconsistency, errors, and poor quality.

1. QAI Global Institute, The Certified Software Quality Analyst (CSQA) Body of Knowledge. Skill Category 1: Quality Principles and Concepts. This BOK outlines the fundamental principle that the type and rigor of process definition and documentation must be appropriate for the work being performed. It distinguishes between defined processes, which can be heavily documented, and empirical processes, which rely more on the expertise and feedback loops of the people involved, especially in complex and creative domains like software development.

2. Humphrey, W. S. (1989). Managing the Software Process. Addison-Wesley Professional. While a foundational text, its principles are embedded in the CSQA BOK. Humphrey’s work on the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) establishes that as process maturity increases, processes become better defined. However, this framework also acknowledges that for creative and complex tasks, the "process" is a framework that enables skilled individuals, rather than a rigid set of instructions that replaces skill. The balance between process definition (written procedures) and the role of the engineer (people skills) is a central theme.

3. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press. This seminal academic work distinguishes between explicit knowledge (which can be codified in written procedures) and tacit knowledge (skills, intuition, and experience residing in people). The book argues that innovation and creative processes are driven by the conversion of tacit knowledge, highlighting the primacy of people skills over written documentation in such contexts. This directly supports the idea that the "mix" changes as processes become more creative.