Business Writing prompts

Write a proposal.

WHAT I AM PROPOSING: [THE THING]
TO WHOM: [ROLE AND WHAT THEY CARE ABOUT]
THE PROBLEM IT SOLVES: [PROBLEM]
WHAT IT COSTS: [MONEY, TIME, PEOPLE]
WHAT IT RETURNS: [BENEFIT, WITH NUMBERS IF YOU HAVE THEM]
WHO ELSE IS AFFECTED: [STAKEHOLDERS]
THE DECISION I NEED: [APPROVAL / BUDGET / RESOURCE / SIGN-OFF]
WHAT THEY WILL OBJECT TO: [ANTICIPATED PUSHBACK]

Structure:

1. THE ASK - first paragraph. What you want them to approve, what it costs, and by when. Never make a decision-maker read three pages to find the ask.
2. THE PROBLEM - in their terms, with evidence. What it costs today to do nothing.
3. THE PROPOSAL - what specifically happens, who does it, over what period.
4. WHY THIS APPROACH - the alternatives considered and why they are worse. Include doing nothing as an option and address it seriously.
5. WHAT IT COSTS - fully. Including the hidden costs: staff time, opportunity cost, ongoing maintenance, what does not happen because of this.
6. WHAT IT RETURNS - with the assumptions stated. Never present a projection without its assumptions; it destroys credibility when questioned.
7. RISKS - the three real ones, each with a mitigation. Omitting risks does not hide them; it just means someone else raises them.
8. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT - if approved, the first three steps and dates.

Rules:
- Address every objection I listed, explicitly, in the body
- Never hide a cost. A cost found later kills the proposal and the credibility.
- Numbers need a source or a stated assumption
- Under 800 words plus appendices

Then: THE QUESTION THEY WILL ASK FIRST, and whether the proposal answers it.

Write a case study.

CUSTOMER: [WHO THEY ARE - INDUSTRY, SIZE]
THEIR SITUATION BEFORE: [THE PROBLEM, WITH SPECIFICS]
WHAT THEY TRIED FIRST: [IF ANYTHING]
WHAT WE DID: [THE SOLUTION]
RESULTS: [NUMBERS, WITH TIMEFRAMES]
QUOTES AVAILABLE: [PASTE ANY]
WHAT WAS HARD ABOUT IT: [HONESTLY]
AUDIENCE FOR THIS CASE STUDY: [WHO WE WANT TO PERSUADE]

Structure:
1. THE RESULT - lead with the outcome and the number. Not 'Company X was founded in 1998'.
2. WHO THEY ARE - two sentences, enough for the reader to recognise themselves.
3. THE PROBLEM - specific and concrete. What was actually happening day to day, what it cost, what they had tried.
4. WHY IT WAS HARD - the constraints, the failed attempts, what made this non-trivial. A problem that sounds easy makes the solution sound unimpressive.
5. WHAT WE DID - the actual approach, with enough detail that a similar reader could judge whether it applies to them. Include what did not work.
6. THE RESULTS - with timeframes and the measurement method. 'Response time improved 40% within three months, measured by X.'
7. WHAT THEY SAY - real quotes. Use the awkward, specific ones over the polished ones.
8. WHO THIS APPLIES TO - and honestly, who it would not.

Rules:
- Never a percentage without a baseline. '300% increase' from what?
- State the measurement period and method for every number
- Include at least one honest difficulty. Case studies with no friction read as fiction and are discounted entirely.
- No superlatives, no 'game-changing', no 'seamless'
- Do not invent quotes. Use only what I gave you, marked [NEED QUOTE] otherwise.
- If my results are thin, say so rather than inflating them

Write a policy.

WHAT IT COVERS: [THE SUBJECT]
WHY IT IS NEEDED: [THE PROBLEM IT SOLVES]
WHO IT APPLIES TO: [SCOPE]
THE ACTUAL RULE: [WHAT PEOPLE MUST OR MUST NOT DO]
EXCEPTIONS: [IF ANY, AND WHO APPROVES THEM]
CONSEQUENCES: [WHAT HAPPENS IF NOT FOLLOWED]
WHO OWNS IT: [ROLE]

Structure:
1. PURPOSE - one sentence. Why this exists.
2. SCOPE - who and what it applies to, and explicitly who it does not.
3. DEFINITIONS - only terms whose meaning is genuinely disputable in this context. Do not define ordinary words.
4. THE POLICY - the rules themselves, numbered, each one thing. Use 'must', 'must not', and 'may' precisely, and say at the top what each means.
5. PROCEDURE - how to comply, step by step, for each common situation.
6. EXCEPTIONS - when the rule does not apply, and the named role who approves a deviation.
7. EDGE CASES - a table of 6-10 specific situations people will ask about: Situation | Does the policy apply? | What to do. This is the section that prevents the same question being asked forty times.
8. IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG - who to tell, how fast.
9. OWNERSHIP AND REVIEW - who owns it, when it is reviewed next.

Rules:
- Every rule must be testable. 'Use good judgement' is not a policy.
- Avoid 'should' - it means neither must nor may and produces inconsistent application
- No rule without a procedure for following it
- Write for the person trying to comply, not for the lawyer
- Where I have not given enough to write a section, write [DECISION NEEDED: the question]

Then: THE THREE QUESTIONS people will ask that this does not answer.

Write a decision memo.

THE DECISION AT STAKE: [WHAT NEEDS DECIDING]
MY RECOMMENDATION: [WHAT YOU THINK SHOULD HAPPEN]
WHO READS THIS: [ROLES, AND WHAT EACH CARES ABOUT]
CURRENT DIRECTION: [WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF NOBODY INTERVENES]
MY EVIDENCE: [DATA, EXPERIENCE, ANALYSIS]
THE COUNTER-ARGUMENT: [WHAT THE OTHER SIDE SAYS]
CONSTRAINTS: [BUDGET, TIME, POLITICS]

Structure:
1. RECOMMENDATION - first sentence. What you think should happen and the decision required.
2. WHY IT MATTERS NOW - the cost of the current direction, or the closing window.
3. THE ARGUMENT - three points maximum, each: claim, evidence, and what it means. Ordered by strength, strongest first, not by chronology.
4. THE STRONGEST OBJECTION - stated at full strength, as its best advocate would put it, then answered. Never a strawman; a reader who holds that view will stop reading the moment they see it misrepresented.
5. WHAT WOULD CHANGE MY MIND - the evidence that would make you wrong. This is the most persuasive paragraph in any memo, because it signals you are reasoning rather than advocating.
6. THE OPTIONS - including doing nothing, each with consequences. Your recommendation marked.
7. THE ASK - what you need, from whom, by when.

Rules:
- Under 1,000 words. Detail goes in an appendix.
- Every claim needs evidence or an explicit statement that it is judgement
- Acknowledge uncertainty where it exists. Overclaiming invites dismissal.
- No emotional appeals, no rhetorical questions
- Do not bury the recommendation to seem balanced

Then: THE READER MOST LIKELY TO DISAGREE, and whether this memo addresses their actual concern or a version of it you find easier to argue with.

Write a cover letter.

THE ROLE: [PASTE THE JOB DESCRIPTION]
MY BACKGROUND: [PASTE CV OR SUMMARY]
WHY I WANT THIS SPECIFIC ROLE: [THE REAL REASON]
WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THE ORGANISATION: [ANYTHING GENUINE]
MY WEAKEST POINT AGAINST THIS ROLE: [BE HONEST]
WHO WILL READ IT: [hiring manager / HR / unknown]

Produce:

1. THE MATCH ANALYSIS - first, privately for me: which of my experiences map to which requirements, strongest first. And where the gaps are.

2. THE LETTER, built on:
   - An opening that says something specific about this role or organisation. Not 'I am writing to apply for'. If I have given you nothing genuine to say about them, say so rather than inventing enthusiasm.
   - The strongest two or three matches, each as evidence: what you did, the situation, and the result. Not adjectives about yourself.
   - Why this role specifically, in a way that could not be said about a similar role elsewhere
   - The gap, addressed briefly and without apology if it is material and obvious. Ignoring an obvious gap reads worse than naming it.
   - A close that is a next step, not a plea

3. Under 350 words.

Rules:
- No 'I am a passionate, results-driven professional'
- No restating the CV. It is attached; they can read it.
- No 'I believe I would be a great fit' - demonstrate it instead
- Every claim about yourself needs an example
- No 'thank you for your consideration' as a closing paragraph
- Do not claim familiarity with the organisation that I have not given you

Then: THE SENTENCE THAT WOULD MAKE THEM READ THE CV, and whether it is in the first paragraph. If not, move it there.

Write instructions.

THE TASK: [WHAT THEY NEED TO DO]
WHO WILL FOLLOW THEM: [EXPERIENCE LEVEL, WHAT THEY ALREADY KNOW]
WHAT THEY NEED FIRST: [ACCESS, TOOLS, INFORMATION]
HOW I DO IT: [PASTE YOUR PROCESS, MESSY IS FINE]
WHAT GOES WRONG: [COMMON MISTAKES]
FORMAT: [written doc / in-app / video script / printed]

Structure:
1. WHAT THIS ACHIEVES AND HOW LONG IT TAKES - so they can decide whether to start now.
2. BEFORE YOU BEGIN - everything needed, as a checklist. Access, permissions, information, tools. Nothing is more frustrating than discovering at step 7 that you needed something at step 1.
3. THE STEPS - numbered, one action each, starting with a verb. For each: the action, the exact thing to click or type (quote labels exactly), and what you should see when it worked.
4. DECISION POINTS - where the path branches, as IF/THEN, not buried in prose.
5. IF IT GOES WRONG - the common failures from my list, each with the literal symptom and the fix.
6. HOW TO KNOW YOU ARE DONE - an observable end state.

Rules:
- One action per step. If a step has an 'and', split it.
- Include what success looks like after each meaningful step. Without it, people continue past a failure.
- Never 'simply', 'just', 'obviously', 'easily'
- Do not explain why unless it changes what they do
- Quote exact UI labels and exact commands
- Warn before destructive or irreversible steps, not after
- Where my process is unclear, write [CLARIFY: question] rather than guessing

Then: THE STEP MOST LIKELY TO BE GOT WRONG, and how to rewrite it to prevent that.

Write an About page.

BUSINESS: [WHAT IT DOES]
WHO RUNS IT: [PEOPLE, BACKGROUND]
WHY IT EXISTS: [THE REAL ORIGIN - what problem or frustration started it]
WHO YOU SERVE: [CUSTOMERS]
WHAT MAKES YOU DIFFERENT: [HONESTLY]
WHAT YOU DELIBERATELY DO NOT DO: [YOUR LIMITS]
SIZE AND STAGE: [SOLO / SMALL TEAM / ESTABLISHED]
WHAT VISITORS TO THIS PAGE WANT TO KNOW: [WHY THEY CLICK 'ABOUT']

Remember why people visit an About page: they are deciding whether to trust you. They want to know who is behind this, whether you understand their problem, and whether you will still be here in a year.

Structure:
1. WHAT YOU DO AND FOR WHOM - one sentence, plain. Not a mission statement.
2. THE ORIGIN - the specific problem or frustration that led to this. Concrete, not 'we saw an opportunity in the market'.
3. WHO YOU ARE - real people with relevant experience. Say what qualifies you, specifically. If it is a solo business, say so; people find that reassuring more often than not.
4. HOW YOU WORK - the approach that distinguishes you, described concretely enough to be checkable.
5. WHAT YOU DO NOT DO - your limits. This builds more trust than any claim about quality, because it shows you are not trying to be everything.
6. WHO YOU ARE FOR AND NOT FOR - honestly.
7. WHAT TO DO NEXT.

Rules:
- No mission or vision statement
- No 'we are passionate about', no 'our values are', no 'we believe in excellence'
- No 'founded in 2019 with a dream'
- Use 'we' or 'I' consistently. If it is one person, do not use 'we' to seem larger.
- Every claim must be checkable. 'Fast' is not; 'we reply within one working day' is.
- Under 500 words

Write a professional email to a [SUPPLIER / IMPORTER / DISTRIBUTOR / CUSTOMER].

RELATIONSHIP: [new / long-standing / strained]
PURPOSE: [e.g. request a quotation, confirm an order, chase a delayed shipment, dispute an invoice, negotiate price, request samples]
KEY FACTS: [ORDER NUMBERS, PRODUCT CODES, QUANTITIES, DATES, AMOUNTS, INCOTERMS if relevant]
WHAT I NEED BACK AND BY WHEN: [ACTION AND DEADLINE]
THEIR LANGUAGE LEVEL: [native English / English as second language]

Write:
1. A subject line with the reference number and topic
2. The email: purpose in the first sentence, the facts in a short list, the exact request and deadline, a polite close
3. A shorter follow-up for if there is no reply in [DAYS] days
4. If the reader uses English as a second language: simple sentences, no idioms, numbers written clearly (e.g. 12 October 2026, not 12/10)

Keep the tone professional and firm where needed. Do not invent any figures or dates I did not give.

Help me write a section of a grant application.

FUNDER AND FUND: [NAME AND WHAT THEY FUND]
THE SECTION AND ITS WORD LIMIT: [e.g. "Need for the project, 400 words"]
FUNDER'S CRITERIA FOR THIS SECTION: [PASTE GUIDANCE]
OUR ORGANISATION: [WHO WE ARE, TRACK RECORD]
THE PROJECT: [WHAT, WHO BENEFITS, HOW, BUDGET]
EVIDENCE WE HAVE: [DATA, SURVEYS, CASE STUDIES, REFERENCES - only real]

Write the section so that it:
- Answers the funder's criteria directly, in the order they list them
- Uses our evidence with sources; marks gaps as [EVIDENCE NEEDED: ...]
- Describes outcomes that are specific and measurable
- Stays within the word limit (state the word count)

Then give me a checklist scoring the draft against each funder criterion (met / partly / missing).