Decision Memo Writing Practice: Before and After

Practice business writing by giving one reader enough information to make one decision. Put the requested action near the beginning, explain the relevant evidence, name the tradeoff, and state the deadline. A polished tone cannot compensate for an unclear decision or a number with no source.

Set the fictional brief

You coordinate a small internal training workshop. A manager must choose between keeping a single 20-person session and splitting it into two 10-person sessions. The trainer is available for either format. The single session requires two trainer hours; the split format requires four. A room fits 20, but the hands-on activity uses ten shared computers. No satisfaction or productivity outcomes have been measured.

Your task is to recommend a format without inventing benefits. The manager controls the extra two trainer hours and needs a decision by Thursday. Treat these facts as the entire brief. If you need a cost estimate, request one or explicitly leave it unknown rather than manufacturing a plausible amount.

Diagnose the first draft

Original weak draft: “We have been discussing the workshop and feel that the current arrangement may not be ideal. People usually enjoy interactive sessions and we want everyone to have a great experience. There are some scheduling considerations. Please let us know your thoughts.”

The reader cannot identify the options, resource request or deadline. The sentence about enjoyment sounds reasonable but provides no evidence for this decision. “Let us know your thoughts” also leaves open whether the writer wants approval, advice or a meeting. Mark those omissions before changing individual words.

Compare a revised memo

To: Training manager

Subject: Approve two workshop sessions by Thursday

“Please approve two 10-person sessions instead of one 20-person session. This requires four trainer hours, two more than the current plan. We have ten computers for the hands-on activity, so the split format gives each participant a computer during that activity.

“The alternative is to keep the single session and have participants work in pairs. That uses fewer trainer hours and may suit a collaborative activity. My recommendation assumes individual practice is the workshop's priority; we have not measured which format produces better learning.

“Please confirm the format by Thursday so I can send the invitations. If the extra trainer time is unavailable, I will prepare the paired activity.”

The revised memo makes the decision reviewable. It distinguishes the known equipment constraint from an unmeasured learning outcome and offers a usable fallback.

Score the evidence, not the elegance

Purdue OWL's memo guidance emphasizes purpose, context, discussion and a closing action. The five checks here are an original practice rubric. They are not a standardized assessment or a measure of professional competence.

Write a second version

Change the brief: there are now 20 computers, but only two trainer hours available. Rewrite the recommendation and explain which sentence from the earlier memo no longer holds. A good revision changes the logic, not only the quantities. Ask a colleague to identify the decision without reading the subject line, then check whether the subject line adds useful context.

Use the career learning project to keep your drafts and the portfolio guide to present the exercise honestly.

Sources and further practice

Purdue OWL: Parts of a Memo supports the reference principle used here. The exercise, example data and review routine on this page are original Paradigm Study teaching examples.

For a broader workflow, see career upskillers. Bring your attempt and the step that confused you into Paradigm Study for a lesson or focused practice. Start a learning notebook.