executive_decision_memos v1.0.0

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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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?

1. 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: voice calibration, worked examples with annotations, common failure modes.
• assets/memo-template.md: the blank template, ready to copy for each new memo.