9.1 Official PSP Memo Writing Framework

9.1 Official PSP Memo Writing Framework

The PSP Communication domain is one memo assignment. AACE uses it because planning and scheduling professionals must explain pressing project issues and possible resolutions to managers and stakeholders. The task is not to write a multi-page claim report. AACE’s Certification Board recommends a finished memo no longer than one full typewritten page.

What the memo tests

The candidate must communicate effectively and efficiently to a recipient who may know less about the subject. The scenario may contain incomplete or conflicting information. The memo should summarize:

1. the nature of the issue;
2. the impact on cost, schedule, or quality;
3. the alternative solutions supplied in the prompt; and
4. a recommended action supported by analysis.

The candidate then transfers the final decision and implementation responsibility to the recipient, while offering assistance or clarification.

Header

Use the administrative details exactly as the prompt supplies them:

Do not substitute your real employer or invent a new project. AACE also tells candidates to know their AACE ID because it is entered for the memo.

Five-paragraph flow

Paragraph 1: issue and impact

Set the stage with enough background for the recipient. State the problem and its effect in a complete stand-alone paragraph. Use the scenario’s dates, variances, or constraints; do not bury the decision issue under software terminology.

Paragraph 2: alternatives

Present each option given in the prompt neutrally. The assignment is testing whether you can evaluate those options. Adding an outside idea does not replace the need to address the supplied alternatives.

Paragraph 3: analysis

Compare the options using the available data. Discuss relevant cost, schedule, and quality effects and the corrective action each option requires. When data conflict, say what assumption you used rather than silently choosing the convenient number.

Paragraph 4: recommendation

Open with a clear, unambiguous recommendation. Support it with the decisive advantages, disadvantages, and tradeoffs. The recommendation should make sense even if read separately.

Paragraph 5: summary and handoff

Restate the recommended solution and explicitly return the final decision and implementation action to the recipient. Offer support or clarification.

A concise planning example

Suppose the prompt says a procurement package is forecast ten days late and supplies three options: accept the date, pay premium freight, or resequence testing. A strong memo would quantify the milestone effect, give one fair sentence to each option, compare cost and delivery consequences, recommend the best-supported option, and ask the project manager to authorize it.

A weak memo would invent liquidated damages, accuse a party of breach, or provide a two-page CPM tutorial. Those additions consume space and may contradict the prompt.

Handling technical uncertainty

Use qualified language:

• “The current update forecasts…” rather than “The project will definitely…”
• “Based on the supplied data…” rather than “The contractor intentionally…”
• “I recommend Option B because…” rather than “There is only one legal outcome…”

If a value is missing, do not manufacture it. Explain the decision using the available evidence and state any necessary assumption briefly.

Final review

Before submitting, check:

• every required header field is present;
• the issue and impact appear in the opening;
• every supplied option is addressed;
• the recommendation is explicit and supported;
• the final paragraph hands action to the recipient;
• the response fits within one page; and
• tone, grammar, names, dates, and arithmetic are correct.

The best memo is a compact decision tool: technically informed, neutral, specific, and easy for its recipient to act on.

Applied review: write for a decision maker

Use a traditional To, From, Date, Subject, and Project heading, then lead with the decision problem. State the issue and material impact in concrete terms. Discuss the alternatives supplied by the prompt, compare them using the relevant time, cost, risk, safety, quality, and stakeholder facts, and recommend one action. End by identifying the decision or authorization needed from the recipient and the next implementation step.

The official AACE Certification Board guidance calls for no more than one full typewritten page. That constraint rewards selection and synthesis, not a multi-page claim narrative. Do calculations and issue spotting before drafting, then include only the figures needed to support the recommendation. Avoid unsupported legal conclusions, emotional language, copied prompt text, and unexplained acronyms.

Reserve a final review for completeness and consistency: did you address issue, impact, alternatives, analysis, recommendation, and handoff; do the dates and numbers match; and can the recipient act? A concise memo can acknowledge uncertainty while still making a clear recommendation and naming the evidence or approval needed next.