Decision Log Template (Free, Copy and Use)

The template

Paste this into a new entry. Keep each field to a few lines; the value is in the consistency.

Decision: <one line, stated as a choice: "Use Postgres for billing", not "database talk">
Date: <YYYY-MM-DD>
Owner: <the person accountable for the outcome>
Status: Active | Superseded by <link> | Reversed

Context: <the problem, in 1-3 sentences, written so someone new could follow it>

Options considered:
- <option A>: <one line on why it was or was not chosen>
- <option B>: <one line on why it was or was not chosen>

Reasoning: <why this option won, in 2-4 sentences>
Expected outcome: <what should be true, and how we will know>
Review on: <YYYY-MM-DD>

Outcome (fill in at review): <what actually happened, and whether the reasoning held>

Why each field exists

• Decision, stated as a choice. "Use Postgres for billing" can be found and checked later. "Database discussion" cannot.
• Context. Future readers need the problem, not only the answer. Write it for someone who joined after the decision.
• Options considered. The rejected options are what people re-propose later. Recording why they lost prevents the same debate.
• Reasoning. The most-skipped field, and the one that matters most. Without it the log says what happened, not why.
• Expected outcome and review date. A decision without a check date is never revisited. Name the signal you will look at.
• Status. When a decision is replaced, link the newer one and mark the old one superseded. Otherwise two entries will contradict each other with no sign which one holds.

How often to log

Log decisions that are expensive to reverse, that affect more than one person, or that someone will plausibly ask about later: pricing, tooling, hiring criteria, architecture, scope cuts. Skip routine choices. A log with 300 trivial entries gets ignored, and the important entries get lost in it.

Review at a fixed cadence

Once a month, read the entries whose review date has passed. For each one, record the outcome, mark it active, superseded or reversed, and note whether the reasoning held. This review is what turns a log into a memory: it tells you which kinds of decisions your team tends to get right.

When a template in a document stops being enough

A template works until the log is long enough that related decisions are hard to see: one decision overrides an older one, two decisions quietly contradict each other, or review dates are missed because nothing reminds anyone. At that point the structure needs to live in a tool that links entries and sends reminders. What decision memory adds to a log covers that difference.

Cadenzova Decisions uses the same fields. You type or paste a sentence, and it structures the entry into the decision, the reasoning, the alternatives weighed, the expected outcome and the status, then links it to related past decisions. The template is free to use on its own.