Markdown proposal template: request one approval now

A proposal requests permission to do something that has not yet been approved. Its central question is immediate: will this decision-maker authorize this recommendation at this cost? The file gives that person the reasons to say yes and the strongest reason to say no.

This Markdown proposal template holds one such request. Both the reusable block and the invented room-move example appear below. If the file ending is unfamiliar, this introduction to .md files explains it.

What approval this proposal seeks

Choose a request that one person can decide. "Consider changing the room" leaves the action open. "Approve six staff hours to move packing into the unused room" names both the action and the commitment. A reader can accept or decline that request without inventing its limits.

The choice is still open when you write this file. You are arguing for permission, rather than fixing the details of agreed work or preserving the reasons behind an earlier choice. A proposal can explain why action is worthwhile without turning into instructions for doing the job.

The proposal template

Place the block below in a file named for the recommendation. Replace the bracketed text with your own argument; each heading takes prose, including the objection and its answer.

# Proposal: [recommended action]

Decision-maker: [Doe placeholder name]

## Approval requested

[State the single action to approve now and the limit on that approval.]

## Recommendation

[Describe the approach you favor and why you favor it over leaving things as they are.]

## Expected benefit

[Describe who gains what, the basis for that expectation and what remains uncertain.]

## Cost

[Give the money or staff time required, including what other work would lose that time.]

## Strongest objection and answer

Objection: [Give the strongest reason to decline the request.]

Answer: [Respond with relevant facts, acknowledge what they do not resolve and explain why you still recommend approval.]

Blank lines separate the headings, paragraphs and two sides of the objection. For the spacing itself, see how Markdown separates paragraphs.

A filled proposal for Doe Holdings

The following room move is invented. Jane Doe, Doe Holdings, the rooms and all quantities in the example are fictional. The request remains pending throughout the sample.

# Proposal: move packing into the unused room

Decision-maker: Jane Doe

## Approval requested

Jane Doe, approve up to six staff hours this week to move the packing bench and packing materials into the unused room beside storage at Doe Holdings. This request authorizes no spending on new equipment.

## Recommendation

Move the existing bench and materials together. The unused room is beside storage; the current bench is at the far end of the building. Keeping the bench where it is would preserve the present walking distance for every packing job.

## Expected benefit

Staff would carry packing materials a shorter distance. During a count of ten packing jobs, each job required two trips from storage to the current bench. The proposed room is closer, but the time saved per job has not been measured. Shorter carrying distance is the reason for the move; an hourly saving is not yet known.

## Cost

The move would use up to six staff hours, including moving the bench, carrying materials and arranging the room. Those hours would otherwise go toward sorting older stock. No new equipment is included, so the financial cost of new equipment is zero.

## Strongest objection and answer

Objection: Six hours of sorting would be lost for a move whose time saving is unknown. Keeping the current room would avoid that immediate loss.

Answer: That loss is real. The ten packing jobs establish repeated trips, and the neighboring room would shorten those trips, but neither fact establishes how quickly the move would repay six hours. I recommend accepting the delay in sorting because reducing the distance staff carry materials is worthwhile even without a measured hourly saving. If Jane Doe requires a known payback period, this proposal does not yet provide enough evidence for approval.

The approval has a ceiling: six staff hours and no new equipment. The benefit concerns carrying distance. The objection concerns the displaced sorting work and unknown payback. Answering it does not erase either cost; Jane Doe still has a reason to decline.

Framing the decision and recommendation

Write the approval requested as a sentence the decision-maker could agree to without further interpretation. Name what permission covers, how much it commits and what it excludes. Avoid burying a second approval inside the recommendation. A room move and new equipment would be two commitments if each could be accepted independently.

The recommendation explains why you favor the action. For the room move, distance between storage and the packing bench supplies the reason. That reason connects the proposed action to the difficulty it is meant to resolve. It also explains why doing nothing would leave the difficulty in place.

Keep the request separate from its justification. "Approve the move" is the decision; "the neighboring room reduces carrying distance" is a reason to approve it. Blending both into a vague wish makes it harder to tell what the person is being asked to authorize.

Framing benefit, cost and the strongest objection

An expected benefit needs a basis. Distinguish what you observed from what you expect: ten jobs involved repeated trips, while the time saved remains unknown. Do not turn a count of trips into a measured saving without evidence about duration.

Cost includes displaced work as well as money. In the sample, using six hours for the move means giving up six hours of sorting. A proposal that mentions zero spending but omits that lost time hides part of the decision.

Give the strongest objection enough room to matter. Choose the reason that could change the decision-maker's answer, then respond to that reason directly. The sample concedes the unknown payback and explains the value judgment behind proceeding anyway. If that judgment is unacceptable to Jane Doe, the proposal has reached a real disagreement rather than concealed one.

A weak answer repeats the benefit without facing the cost. A useful answer explains why the benefit is worth that cost, or admits that a missing fact prevents a sound approval. Approval remains the decision-maker's choice.

Naming a proposal awaiting a decision

A name such as packing-room-proposal.md identifies the action being considered. Keep one approval request in that file so the argument remains attached to its own cost and objection. Read about Markdown file names when choosing words that identify your request.

If the request changes from moving a bench to buying equipment, revise the argument before seeking approval for the new commitment. The decision sentence, benefit, cost and objection should concern the same recommendation when the decision-maker reads them.

Where Sashmark fits

For a proposal folder, Sashmark's intended role is desktop reading and editing. This Markdown app is in development for people whose files are written by AI agents. The argument for approval remains yours to write.