Decision Log Template

DECISION PHILOSOPHY

Decision Documentation Fundamentals

DECISION LOG PHILOSOPHY

WHY DOCUMENT DECISIONS:
☐ Creates institutional memory
☐ Enables learning from outcomes
☐ Provides context for future decisions
☐ Helps onboard new leaders
☐ Supports accountability
☐ Prevents relitigating

DOCUMENTATION PRINCIPLES:

1. CAPTURE CONTEXT, NOT JUST CHOICE
   ☐ Why was this a decision point?
   ☐ What alternatives existed?
   ☐ What was the context/constraints?
   ☐ Future you will thank you

2. DOCUMENT AT TIME OF DECISION
   ☐ Memory fades quickly
   ☐ Capture rationale fresh
   ☐ Include uncertainties
   ☐ Note what was unknown

3. PROPORTIONAL DOCUMENTATION
   ☐ Major decisions = full doc
   ☐ Minor decisions = brief note
   ☐ Don't over-document
   ☐ Time is precious

4. REVIEW AND LEARN
   ☐ Schedule reviews
   ☐ Honest assessment
   ☐ Learn for future
   ☐ Update approach

DECISIONS WORTH DOCUMENTING:
☐ Irreversible or expensive to reverse
☐ Strategic direction
☐ People decisions (key hires, exits)
☐ Major investments
☐ Policy/cultural changes
☐ Crisis responses

---

DECISION DOCUMENTATION

Comprehensive Decision Log Template

DECISION LOG SYSTEM

═══════════════════════════════════════
MAJOR DECISION LOG (Full Detail)
═══════════════════════════════════════

DECISION #: ___
DATE: _______________
TITLE: _______________

CLASSIFICATION:
☐ Strategic   ☐ Organizational   ☐ Financial
☐ Operational ☐ Cultural        ☐ Product
☐ Crisis      ☐ People

REVERSIBILITY:
☐ Easily reversible (Type 2)
☐ Difficult to reverse (Type 1)

DECISION MAKER: _______________

THE DECISION:
Clear statement of what was decided:
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________

═══════════════════════════════════════
CONTEXT
═══════════════════════════════════════

SITUATION:
What triggered this decision point?
_________________________________________
_________________________________________

PROBLEM/OPPORTUNITY:
What problem are we solving or opportunity pursuing?
_________________________________________
_________________________________________

CONSTRAINTS:
What limitations did we face?
☐ Time: _______________
☐ Budget: _______________
☐ Resources: _______________
☐ Other: _______________

INFORMATION AVAILABLE:
What did we know at the time?
☐ _______________
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

What did we NOT know?
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

═══════════════════════════════════════
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
═══════════════════════════════════════

OPTION A (Chosen):
Description: _______________
Pros:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________
Cons:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

OPTION B:
Description: _______________
Pros:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________
Cons:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________
Why not chosen: _______________

OPTION C:
Description: _______________
Why not chosen: _______________

DO NOTHING:
What would happen if we did nothing?
_______________
Why wasn't this acceptable?
_______________

═══════════════════════════════════════
RATIONALE
═══════════════════════════════════════

WHY THIS OPTION:
Primary reasons for this choice:
1. _______________
2. _______________
3. _______________

KEY FACTORS IN DECISION:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

RISKS ACCEPTED:
What risks are we accepting with this decision?
☐ Risk: _______________ | Mitigation: _______________
☐ Risk: _______________ | Mitigation: _______________
☐ Risk: _______________ | Mitigation: _______________

ASSUMPTIONS:
What assumptions is this decision based on?
☐ _______________
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

═══════════════════════════════════════
STAKEHOLDERS
═══════════════════════════════════════

RACI:
Responsible (doing the work): _______________
Accountable (owns outcome): _______________
Consulted (input sought): _______________
Informed (told after): _______________

CONSULTATION SUMMARY:
Who was consulted and what did they say?
| Person | Input | Incorporated? |
|--------|-------|---------------|
| | | ☐ Yes ☐ No |
| | | ☐ Yes ☐ No |
| | | ☐ Yes ☐ No |

ALIGNMENT:
☐ Leadership team aligned
☐ Board informed (if applicable)
☐ Team informed (if applicable)

═══════════════════════════════════════
IMPLEMENTATION
═══════════════════════════════════════

OWNER: _______________

KEY MILESTONES:
| Milestone | Date | Owner | Status |
|-----------|------|-------|--------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |

SUCCESS METRICS:
How will we know this was a good decision?
☐ Metric 1: _______________
☐ Metric 2: _______________
☐ Metric 3: _______________

COMMUNICATION PLAN:
Who needs to know and when?
| Audience | Timing | Channel | Message |
|----------|--------|---------|---------|
| | | | |
| | | | |

═══════════════════════════════════════
REVIEW
═══════════════════════════════════════

REVIEW TRIGGER:
When should we revisit this decision?
☐ Calendar date: _______________
☐ Event-based: _______________
☐ If X happens: _______________

SCHEDULED REVIEW DATE: _______________

REVIEW OWNER: _______________

Decision Categories

DECISION CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

═══════════════════════════════════════
DECISION TYPES
═══════════════════════════════════════

STRATEGIC DECISIONS:
Examples:
☐ Market entry/exit
☐ Business model changes
☐ M&A decisions
☐ Major pivots
☐ Competitive response
Review cycle: Quarterly
Documentation: Full

ORGANIZATIONAL DECISIONS:
Examples:
☐ Restructuring
☐ New function creation
☐ Reporting changes
☐ Process changes
Review cycle: Monthly
Documentation: Full

FINANCIAL DECISIONS:
Examples:
☐ Budget allocation
☐ Pricing changes
☐ Fundraising terms
☐ Major expenses
Review cycle: Quarterly
Documentation: Full

PEOPLE DECISIONS:
Examples:
☐ Key hires
☐ Executive exits
☐ Promotions
☐ Compensation
Review cycle: Quarterly
Documentation: Full (confidential)

PRODUCT DECISIONS:
Examples:
☐ Roadmap priorities
☐ Feature cuts
☐ Technical architecture
☐ Platform choices
Review cycle: Monthly
Documentation: Standard

OPERATIONAL DECISIONS:
Examples:
☐ Process changes
☐ Tool selection
☐ Policy updates
Review cycle: Monthly
Documentation: Brief

═══════════════════════════════════════
TYPE 1 VS TYPE 2 DECISIONS
═══════════════════════════════════════

TYPE 1 (One-Way Door):
Characteristics:
☐ Irreversible or very costly to reverse
☐ High stakes
☐ Long-term implications

Process:
☐ Take time to decide
☐ Gather broad input
☐ Document thoroughly
☐ CEO decision

Examples:
☐ Acquisition
☐ Shutting down a product
☐ Executive hire/fire
☐ Major funding decision

TYPE 2 (Two-Way Door):
Characteristics:
☐ Reversible with limited cost
☐ Lower stakes
☐ Can course correct

Process:
☐ Decide quickly
☐ Empower others to decide
☐ Learn and iterate
☐ Delegate

Examples:
☐ Feature experiments
☐ Vendor selection
☐ Process tweaks
☐ Hiring (non-executive)

Decision Quality Review

DECISION REVIEW FRAMEWORK

═══════════════════════════════════════
SCHEDULED REVIEW
═══════════════════════════════════════

DECISION: _______________
DATE MADE: _______________
REVIEW DATE: _______________
REVIEWER: _______________

OUTCOME ASSESSMENT:
☐ Significantly better than expected
☐ Somewhat better than expected
☐ As expected
☐ Somewhat worse than expected
☐ Significantly worse than expected

RESULTS SUMMARY:
What actually happened?
_________________________________________
_________________________________________

METRICS REVIEW:
| Metric | Expected | Actual | Delta |
|--------|----------|--------|-------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |

═══════════════════════════════════════
LEARNING EXTRACTION
═══════════════════════════════════════

WHAT WORKED:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

WHAT DIDN'T WORK:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

WHAT SURPRISED US:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

ASSUMPTIONS THAT PROVED TRUE:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

ASSUMPTIONS THAT PROVED FALSE:
☐ _______________
☐ _______________

═══════════════════════════════════════
PROCESS LEARNING
═══════════════════════════════════════

DECISION PROCESS QUALITY:
| Factor | Score (1-5) |
|--------|-------------|
| Had right information | |
| Considered right alternatives | |
| Consulted right people | |
| Made in timely manner | |
| Executed well | |

WHAT WE'D DO DIFFERENTLY:
In decision-making:
☐ _______________
In implementation:
☐ _______________

APPLY TO FUTURE DECISIONS:
What principle or learning applies broadly?
_________________________________________

═══════════════════════════════════════
DECISION CONTINUATION
═══════════════════════════════════════

CURRENT STATUS:
☐ Decision stands as-is
☐ Decision needs adjustment
☐ Decision should be reversed
☐ Decision is complete/closed

IF ADJUSTING:
What changes are needed?
_________________________________________

NEXT REVIEW: _______________

Decision Quality Dashboard

Metric	Target	Actual	Notes
Decisions documented	100% major
Reviews completed on time	100%
Decisions meeting expectations	>70%
Time to decision (avg)	<2 weeks
Decisions delegated	>50%

---