# Decision Journal: [decision] – YYYY-MM-DD

> Record the decision AND your reasoning at the time – so review
> reveals whether your process was good, not just the outcome.
> Convention from Farnam Street's decision journal.

| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| Decision | [the choice, stated precisely] |
| Date | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Decided by | @name |
| Review date | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Reversible? | Yes / No / Costly |

## The decision

[What is being decided, in one sentence.]

## Options considered

| Option | Pros | Cons |
|--------|------|------|
| [chosen option] | | |
| [alternative] | | |
| Do nothing | | |

## What I believe right now

- Expected outcome: [what you predict happens]
- Confidence: [N% – put a number on it]
- Key assumption: [the thing that must be true]
- What could go wrong: [pre-mortem items]

## Context & state

- Mood / energy: [honest – state affects judgment]
- Information quality: [solid / thin / biased?]
- Who I consulted: [@names]

## Chosen

[Option], because [the actual reason – not the polished one].

## Review (fill at review date)

| Question | Answer |
|----------|--------|
| What happened? | |
| Was the outcome as predicted? | |
| Was the *process* sound? | |
| What would I do differently? | |
| What did I learn? | |

## Track record

Running tally: N decisions logged, N reviewed, calibration notes:
[where you're systematically over/under-confident]