Professional Communication Templates

Reusable structures for the messages that recur, across email, chat and documents.

Each has the structure, the prompt, and the thing that usually goes wrong.

Status update

Structure: where we are → what changed → what is blocked → what I need.

Write a status update on [PROJECT] for [AUDIENCE].

Where we are: [STATE]
Since last update: [CHANGES]
Blocked on: [BLOCKERS, OR "NOTHING"]
I need from you: [ASK, OR "NOTHING"]

Rules: status first, not process. Under [N] words.
If nothing is blocked, say so explicitly rather than omitting it.
No "we continue to make progress".

Goes wrong: burying the blocker in paragraph four. If something is blocked, it goes in the first two lines.

Escalation

Structure: the problem → the impact → what I tried → the decision I need.

I need to escalate [ISSUE] to [WHO].

Problem: [WHAT IS WRONG]
Impact if unresolved: [CONSEQUENCE, WITH A DATE]
What I have already tried: [ATTEMPTS]
What I need from you: [A DECISION / RESOURCE / AUTHORITY]
Deadline for the decision: [WHEN]

Neutral tone. No blame. Make the decision easy to make —
give options if there are any.

Goes wrong: escalating without naming the decision needed. Then it is a complaint, and it sits.

Proposal or recommendation

Structure: recommendation → why → what it costs → what happens if we do not.

Write a recommendation for [DECISION].

My recommendation: [WHAT]
Reasons, strongest first: [REASONS]
Cost: [MONEY, TIME, RISK]
Alternatives considered and why not: [OPTIONS]
Cost of doing nothing: [CONSEQUENCE]

Lead with the recommendation. Do not build to it.
Include the strongest argument against my recommendation, honestly.

Goes wrong: a balanced survey with no recommendation. If you were asked for a view, give one.

Handover

Structure: what this is → current state → what is in flight → where everything lives → who to ask.

Write a handover for [WORK] going to [PERSON].

What it is: [PURPOSE]
Current state: [WHERE THINGS STAND]
In flight: [OPEN ITEMS WITH DEADLINES AND OWNERS]
Access needed: [SYSTEMS, PERMISSIONS]
Where things live: [LINKS]
Known landmines: [THINGS THAT HAVE BITTEN ME]
Who to ask about what: [PEOPLE]

Write it for someone with no context. Assume I am unreachable.

Goes wrong: written for someone who already knows. "Known landmines" is the section people are most grateful for.

Saying no

Structure: the answer → one reason → the alternative → close warmly.

I need to decline [REQUEST] from [WHO].
Real reason: [FOR YOUR CONTEXT]
Reason I will give: [WHAT YOU WILL SAY]
Alternative I can offer: [OR "NONE"]
Relationship: [DESCRIBE]

Decline in the first sentence. Give exactly one reason —
extra reasons invite negotiation. Under 80 words.

Goes wrong: three reasons. Each one is a door someone can argue through.

Chasing

Structure: the specific thing → why it matters now → a concrete next step.

I am chasing [WHAT] from [WHO], [TIME] overdue.
Why it matters: [CONSEQUENCE OF FURTHER DELAY]
Relationship: [DESCRIBE]

Do not use: "just checking in", "circling back", "gentle reminder",
"following up on my last email".
Give them an easy way to reply — a yes/no question or a date to confirm.
Under 70 words.

Goes wrong: apologising for chasing. You are not doing anything wrong.

Announcing a change

Structure: what is changing → when → what you must do → why → where to ask.

Announce [CHANGE] to [AUDIENCE].

What changes: [WHAT]
Effective: [DATE]
What they must do: [ACTION, OR "NOTHING"]
Why: [REASON]
Questions to: [WHO]

Lead with what changes and what they must do. The reasoning comes after.
Do not use "exciting" unless it is genuinely good news for them.

Goes wrong: leading with the rationale. People want to know what they have to do.

The universal checks

Before sending anything drafted with AI:

• One clear ask, and it is findable in five seconds
• Every date, number and name verified
• No commitment I cannot keep
• Sounds like me
• If it is difficult, I read it again an hour later
• The person receiving it knows what to do next

Building your own

When you write the same kind of message three times, template it:

Here are three messages I have sent of the same type: [PASTE]

Extract the underlying structure. Produce a reusable template with
[PLACEHOLDERS] for what changes. Then tell me what varied between them
that should NOT be templated.

That last part matters — over-templating makes everything sound like a form letter.