After my last post on The Art of Memo Writing I got some feedback that these memos are shallow and dumb. Way too oversimplified. I pointed people to public sources for both and there was a long silence. (I added some below)

So what happened? Certainly the authors of the research leading to these memos were certainly not dumb. And a lot of these memos got put into action, or at least got discussed and looked at.

It’s not a Summary!

I’ve written, contributed, edited a few of those. the #1 mistake people make is to make the memo a summary of the research. This is not a summary, neither on technical background nor on the research nuances nor on the recommended policies!

I urge you to read the memos from a completely different perspective. Forget about nuances: Assume you had not read the research, and you were not an expert, and you had only a 10,000 feet view with sprinkled-in bias or “common sense” or previous politically convenient views.

Just get to the next meeting — like in VC!

When you pitch your startup the first time to a VC, that Partner or Principal has to convince the rest of the Partnership to do more work on you. But everyone is already busy with something, so something has to be dropped. You have to be in the #1-5 priority slot, or you are nowhere (“… let’s stay in touch …”)

Likewise with memos, you need to get someone to look at that memo and convince others that it would be a good idea to drop some ongoing work on another policy to do more work on this policy. And actually (hopefully) read the full report and call you for questions.

• What logical argument of the memo is the most intuitive for the policy maker? They will ignore all other arguments and logic. You might get glowing phone calls from a few people who read the report or already came to a similar, counterintuitive conclusion. But a few avid supporters are rarely enough to get broad buy-in.
• What policy recommendations could be acted upon without contradicting previous statements, “party lines”, or political programs? Everything else will be rejected — few people like paddling back on their previous statements …
• How are they going to interpret your recommendations? Do they understand what is essential? Will they make any recommendations more strict or more loose?
• Will a majority of the target audience (the Hill or DoD departments) find themselves in these policies, will a majority see this as aligned with their political agenda? Write those policy recommendations too specific and you will get the glowing support by few, meh reactions by most, and livid push back by more people than you thought existed in your audience.
• What is the risk that it could be blown up and thrown together with other hot topics or policies, and in the process getting completely abused as a carrier and catch-all, or watered down to fit with the other policies?
• Bonus 1: if your policy curtails or changes other committees or institutions, you might get the runaround to nowhere despite political alignment — perhaps there were other silent agreements you didn’t know about.
• Bonus 2: Because of bonus 1, you need to give everyone a graceful retreat option, a very minor thing that as well could be completely eliminated from the policy suggestion, but also could serve as an easy scapegoat if necessary (“… oh if it only wasn’t for this part of the policy …”). Otherwise you make people look stupid. And they will remember that.

---

Memo Sources and Examples

Hill Memos

• Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports
• HASC/DARPA/DOD briefings prepared for legislative staffers (e.g., DIU testimony materials, GAO-style formats)
• Memo templates used by the National Security Commission on AI, and CHIPS & Science Act summary memos
• Structuring practices from leading think tanks (e.g., CNAS, CSIS) tailored to appropriations and authorizing committee staff

DoD Memos

• PEO and DASD white paper formats from services like the Army Futures Command, DIU, and DARPA
• Actual templates used by Joint Staff J7, OUSD(A&S), and USAF RCO teams for internal justification memos
• Language and structure from Acquisition Strategy Reports (ASRs) and Transition Readiness Assessments (TRAs)