Decision Records
Draft, review, and manage decision records (DRs) — short documents that capture one significant choice, its context, the options considered, the decision, and its consequences. Use when someone wants to write a decision record or ADR, decide whether a choice is significant enough to warrant one, pick between a lightweight and a comprehensive template, walk through drafting one step by step, find a worked example close to their own domain, or check a draft before publishing it for comment.
Help a person write a good decision record (DR) — for any domain: strategy, sales, marketing, product, HR, risk, project/operations, or software architecture, not just engineering. Work through the steps below with them; don't dump the whole repo at once. This skill lives inside the decision-records repo, so the paths below (../../guide/index.md, etc.) are relative to this skill's own folder.
Step 0 — Does this decision need a record?
Ask, or infer from context. Write a record if any of these are true:
- Reversing the decision would be costly, slow, or embarrassing.
- It affects people outside the room where it's being decided.
- Someone will plausibly ask "why did we do it this way?" a year from now.
- There are genuinely contested options with reasonable people on different sides.
- It sets a precedent other decisions will need to stay consistent with.
Skip it if the decision is cheap to reverse, affects only the decision-maker or one self-contained team, is already covered by existing policy, or is explicitly temporary (a pilot, workaround, or time-boxed experiment). Full checklist: ../../checklist/index.md#checklist-does-this-decision-need-a-decision-record.
Step 1 — Choose lightweight or comprehensive
Default to lightweight — six fields, one page:
- Title — short, present-tense, active ("Switch payroll provider to Provider B"), not a topic or a question.
- Status + metadata —
Status(request for comments | proposed | accepted | rejected | deprecated | superseded),Date,Decision-maker(s),Owner. - Context — the situation and constraints, written for a reader with zero meeting background.
- Options considered — the real alternatives (include "do nothing" if relevant) as facts and trade-offs, not a strawman lineup.
- Decision — the choice in plain active voice: "We will do X."
- Consequences — what changes as a result, not a rehash of the options debate.
Move to comprehensive — the full template at ../../template/index.md — only for high-stakes, multi-stakeholder decisions. It adds Assumptions, Constraints, optional Cost/SWOT/PEST analysis, per-person Opinions, a separate Argument section, and Related decisions/requirements/artifacts/principles/notes.
Step 2 — Draft it
Write the six lightweight fields above in order, one to a few sentences each. Keep the whole thing to about one page — if it's sprawling, it's probably more than one decision; split it. For a fully worked, field-by-field walkthrough with a realistic non-technical example, follow ../../tutorial/index.md. For a model close to the user's own domain, browse the table in ../../examples/index.md (strategy, sales, marketing, product, HR, risk, project, and technology examples are all there).
Step 3 — File it
Store it where the team already works — a version-controlled decisions/ folder, a wiki space, or a shared drive, named consistently, e.g. YYYY-MM-DD-short-title-slug.md. Keep (or start) an index listing every record's title, status, and date — see ../../examples/index.md for the pattern. Many teams get faster adoption calling the folder decisions/ rather than decision-records/ — same template, more approachable name.
Step 4 — Before publishing for comment
- A stranger to the discussion could read it and understand both the decision and why.
- No unresolved "did you consider X?" gaps.
- Status is
request for commentsorproposed, with an explicit comment deadline (e.g., "comments by Friday, then default-accepted"). - Decision-maker(s) and owner are named, not implied.
Full pre-publish and review checklists: ../../checklist/index.md.
Step 5 — After acceptance
- Decision-maker explicitly accepts, rejects, or sends it back — silence isn't acceptance. Update
Statusand the date. - Never silently delete or rewrite a published record. If it's later reversed or replaced, write a new record and set the old one's status to
superseded, linking forward. - Name an accountable owner who reviews the record periodically (annually is a common cadence).
Reference material in this repo
../../guide/index.md— full leadership-oriented guide: why this matters, anatomy, lifecycle, governance, best practices, pitfalls.../../template/index.md— the comprehensive template.../../tutorial/index.md— hands-on walkthrough (~20 minutes).../../examples/index.md— worked examples across business functions.../../checklist/index.md— checklists for every stage, and for running the practice across an organization.../../help/index.md— FAQ, troubleshooting table, and glossary.