---
name: "executive_decision_memos"
description: "Draft decision memos executives actually read: one-page BLUF structure, explicit decision criteria, fair options with tradeoffs, disciplined recommendations. Triggers on: decision memo, board memo, recommendation memo, executive recommendation, decision brief, 'write this up for leadership', 'help me decide and document it'."
---

# Executive Decision Memos

## Purpose

Turn a pending decision into a one-page memo that makes the call explicit:
the recommendation, what backs it, what argues against it, and what would
change the answer. The reader is a busy executive who will decide from this
page alone, so it has to carry the full reasoning, not just the conclusion.

## Workflow

1. **Intake.** Before drafting, establish these five facts. Ask if any are missing:
   - The decision question, in one sentence. "What is the reader being asked to decide?"
   - The reader and their authority (who decides, who else signs off).
   - The decision deadline and the cost of delay.
   - The known options, including "do nothing" when it is a real alternative.
   - The facts provided versus the facts missing. Mark the boundary explicitly.

2. **Set the criteria first.** Agree on what the options are judged by before
   scoring them. Typical axes: cost, time to implement, reversibility, risk,
   team capacity, strategic fit. List them, rank them, then score options
   against them. Criteria chosen after the favorite is picked are not criteria.

3. **Draft in BLUF order.** Recommendation first, then context, then options
   with honest tradeoffs, then the case, then risks and next steps. See the
   Output Contract below and the full annotated template in
   [assets/memo-template.md](assets/memo-template.md).

4. **Run the adversarial pass.** Before delivering, check:
   - Is the strongest objection to the recommendation stated plainly?
   - Does every option get a fair hearing, with no strawman alternatives?
   - Are assumptions stated as falsifiable claims ("if X is true, this works")?
   - Is there a reversal rule: metric + threshold + date that would undo the call?
   - Is every number, date, and quote sourced or flagged as unverified?

5. **Deliver and file.** Hand back the memo plus a one-paragraph note listing
   what was verified, what was assumed, and what the reader must still confirm.

## Output Contract

Every memo carries this structure. One page is the target; two is the ceiling.

```
# [Decision question] — Decision Memo
Prepared [date] | To: [decision maker] | From: [author]
Decision requested: [approve / select / fund / hire / proceed / stop]
Deadline: [date] | Cost of delay: [consequence]

## Recommendation (BLUF)
[The call, one paragraph. Action + scope + timing.]

## Why this option
- [Reason 1, with evidence]
- [Reason 2, with evidence]
- [Reason 3, with evidence]

## Decision criteria
[Ranked list of what the options were judged on.]

## Options considered
| Option | What it is | Upside | Downside | Cost/effort | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A (recommended) | | | | | |
| B | | | | | |
| Do nothing | | | | | |

## Strongest objection
[The best argument against the recommendation, stated fairly.]

## What must be true
[Falsifiable assumptions. "If X is true, then this choice makes sense."]

## Risks and mitigations
- [Risk]: [mitigation or contingency]

## Reversal rule
[Metric + threshold + date that would change the decision.]

## What I need from you
[Specific action: approval, choice among options, 15-minute discussion.]
```

## Operating Rules

1. **No invented facts.** Every number, date, quote, and event must be verified
   from a source the user provided or a checkable source. Unverifiable claims
   get cut, or framed as opinion and labeled as such.
2. **The recommendation earns its place.** Rank options against stated criteria
   before writing the recommendation. Never introduce a surprise option in the
   recommendation section, and never plead for a low-scoring option at the end.
3. **Do nothing is always on the table.** Include it unless it is genuinely not
   an alternative. Its downside is usually "the problem continues."
4. **Detail matches the decision.** Keep technical depth proportional to what
   the reader needs to decide. Cut what does not change the call.
5. **One decision per memo.** A memo that asks the reader to decide three
   things asks them to decide nothing.
6. **Name the open questions.** List what was not provided and who needs to
   supply it. A memo that hides its gaps reads as dishonest.
7. **Write like a person.** Short sentences, active verbs, plain words. No
   hedging ("it could potentially be argued that"), no filler ("in today's
   fast-paced world"), no em dashes. If a sentence sounds like a press
   release, rewrite it.

## Reference material

- [references/decision-memo-reference.md](references/decision-memo-reference.md):
  voice calibration, worked examples with annotations, common failure modes.
- [assets/memo-template.md](assets/memo-template.md): the blank template,
  ready to copy for each new memo.