It's both. No documentation is irresponsible. An over emphasis on 'repeatability' through exhaustive process and product documentation (and strict adherence to

It's both. No documentation is irresponsible. An over emphasis on 'repeatability' through exhaustive process and product documentation (and strict adherence to said process) is a red flag in my book (in most situations). To me it either means that the employer is worried about its employees walking (as you suggested), or that the employer wants to minimize the effects of discarding the employee. In the first case, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. In the latter case you'll achieve what you're after, but not how you planned. Instead you're minimizing the current value and productivity of the employee, meaning that when you fire him/her, the impact will be minimal. The moral of the story? Limit the scope of your documentation, and place high emphasis on that limited scope. Instead of worrying about how you'll replace someone when they're gone, worry about whether or not you're putting them in an environment where they can perform to the potential of their unique abilities as an individual. (And don't even get me started on the whole "No documentation is better than bad documentation" thing.)