All answers
Which is better for documenting complex software workflows: a Loom video or an auto-generated SOP?
March 6, 2026·2 min read·Employee Onboarding Documentation
An auto-generated SOP is better for complex software workflows because it produces searchable, step-by-step documentation that users can reference while performing the task. A Loom video captures the workflow but produces output that cannot be searched, cannot be followed alongside the task, and takes 10x longer to update when the software changes.
How do they compare for complex workflows?
| Factor | Auto-Generated SOP (Glyde) | Loom Video |
|---|---|---|
| Output | Written steps + annotated screenshots | Video recording |
| Complexity handling | Each step is isolated and clear | Steps blur together in continuous video |
| Branching logic | "If X, go to step 12" | Must explain verbally — easy to miss |
| Cross-app workflows | Clear transition markers between tools | Tab switches are hard to follow on video |
| Error handling | Separate section for common mistakes | Must narrate during recording |
| Reference during work | Open beside the task, follow step-by-step | Constantly pause/play/switch tabs |
| Search | Ctrl+F for any step | Cannot search video content |
| Update when UI changes | Re-record affected steps (5 min) | Re-record entire video + re-narrate |
When are complex workflows too complex for either format?
For workflows with more than 30 steps or multiple decision branches, consider:
- Break into sub-workflows — A 40-step process is better as four 10-step SOPs
- Add a process map first — A visual overview showing the full flow before the detailed steps
- Use Glyde for each sub-workflow — Record each section separately for easier updates
Loom videos work as supplements for complex workflows — a 3-minute overview video that provides context before the new hire dives into the detailed written SOP.
This answer is part of our guide to employee onboarding documentation.