Write a weekly advertising decision memo that leads to a clear next step

The seven-field decision row

Use one page with a fixed header: client, accounts included, reporting dates, currency, KPI definition and data extraction time. Then create one row per decision, with seven fields: observed fact, evidence reference, interpretation, alternative explanation, next step, owner and review date. A fact is a number or verified state. An interpretation explains why it might matter. Keeping those columns separate prevents a confident story from silently becoming the evidence.

Consider a teaching example, not a client result: spend rose from 1,000 to 1,200 in one currency while compatible qualified leads fell from 20 to 15. The memo records those inputs and the arithmetic CPA change from 50 to 80. It does not immediately say the audience is exhausted. A possible explanation is weaker lead qualification; another is incomplete status updates from sales. The next step is to reconcile qualification records for the affected dates, with the sales operations owner responsible.

Limit the main page to decisions that change attention, resources or timing. Put routine metric tables in an attachment. An unresolved issue can stay on the memo, but it needs a reason and a next evidence request. In AdAce Ads, period comparisons and client reports provide inputs; the proposed memo is an operating document, not a claim that a new memo workflow is built into the product. References to account history should identify the affected object and time, not merely link to a dashboard homepage.

Make unresolved decisions visible

• Use explicit decision types: investigate, continue, hold or request approval. They make waiting a deliberate outcome rather than an apparent absence of work. Add the condition that would change the decision, such as confirmed missing qualification records.
• Separate the person who gathers evidence from the person authorized to change the account. One owner coordinates the next step; that does not grant advertising permissions or override a client policy.
• Carry forward only unresolved rows with their original dates. Repeatedly rewriting an open issue as new hides how long it has remained unanswered and makes delayed decisions difficult to diagnose.

Prepare and review the memo

1. Freeze the reporting boundary before writing: use the agreed KPI, comparable dates and a stated maturity rule. Identify partial or unavailable data explicitly. If sources disagree, record the disagreement rather than choosing whichever supports the preferred action.
2. Select the most consequential observed changes. For each, attach the smallest evidence set needed to reproduce the finding: saved report, filters, metric definition and calculation. Avoid including contact details or unrelated clients in the attachment.
3. Write one hypothesis and at least one credible alternative. Ask what observation would distinguish them. If no available observation can do that, lower the confidence and propose a learning step instead of a large budget response.
4. Assign a concrete next deliverable and a review date. In the example, the deliverable is a reconciliation of qualified-lead counts, not the vague instruction to improve CPA. Record any change request separately through the existing control process.
5. At the next review, mark each row completed, superseded or still open. Compare the promised deliverable with what arrived. Record whether the evidence changed the decision; do not treat execution of a task as proof that the original hypothesis was correct.

What the memo cannot prove

Sources and further reading

• AdAce Ads period comparison
• AdAce Ads client reports
• AdAce Ads write policies