Memorandum Analysis: Teambuilding Revision

Memorandum One

Purpose:

The purpose of this memorandum is to inform all Central Administration employees of the University of the Philippines – Manila that the schedule to their team-building exercise has been revised. While the purpose is clear within the text of the memo, the title obscures the purpose by failing to address to specify which time schedule is being revised.

Question:

The key question asks what times have been revised in the new time schedule. This question is answered within the first paragraph where the writer advises that the Batangas should follow their original time schedule. The question is directly related to the purpose because answers the question of when the time schedule is necessary.

Information:

The author informs the Batangas that they should follow their original time schedule while listing the regular time schedule for those who are not participating in the exercise. The information is accurate. Yet, the author fails to address the complexity of the issue by failing to elaborate on the times for the original Batangas schedule.

Concepts:

The key idea expressed is that employees need to anticipate and make changes to their schedule in order to attend the 2012 team-building activity.

Assumption:

The author of the memo possesses partial sensitivity to what she or he is asking. While the author asks for individuals to change their time schedule, the author fails to consider and help make arrangements for individuals who might be inconvenienced by the schedule change.

Inferences:

The conclusions of the memo are justifiable. The client discusses the schedule changes that will take place and concludes by thanking the reader for taking the time to review the changes. Yet, the author fails to consider that readers might need to contact an event organizer to obtain further clarification or make arrangements if they cannot attend the activity.

Point of View:

The author implicitly assumed that the schedule changes could be met by the reader. Thus, the author does not consider alternative points of view or possible objections to the materials.

Implications:

The author does not show sensitivity to the implications and consequences of the position she or he is taking. The author automatically assumed the reader will make the adjustments to their schedule and be able to attend the team building activity regardless of the last-minute revision to schedule.

Memorandum Two

Purpose:

The purpose of this memorandum is to inform employees of the dress code for the unnamed company.

Question:

The memorandum considers the question of what is and is not appropriate for staff members to wear to work. The memo does not consider the complexity of the issue and simply dictates dress code requirements without considering other perspectives that might be held on the appropriateness of certain forms of attire.

Information:

The memorandum provides detailed information on the dress code. The memorandum outlines the appropriate attire for both male and female employees. It also specifies the different dress requirements for staff members and those on the business side of the organization. However, the memorandum dictates what is and is not correct dress without attempting to provide a rationale or explain the decision-making process that informed the dress code.

Concepts:

The primary concept that informs the author’s reasoning is that employees should dress appropriately, professionally, and wear attire that reflects well upon the company.

Assumptions:

The memorandum makes the assumption that employees will share the perspective that the banned dress items are inappropriate for work. It also makes the assumption that a lack of professionalism in dress is an organizational problem that needs to be addressed. These are justifiable because the organization possesses the authority to dictate the conduct of employees.

Inferences:

The inference is that employees will comply with the dress code standards immediately. This follows from the additional information in the memorandum because the author makes it clear that the policy is to be followed.

Point of View:

The memorandum is written from the point of view of management and does not consider whether employees or other readers would consider the banned clothing professional or appropriate for work. It does not demonstrate sensitivity to the perspectives of employees who might prefer to wear the banned articles of clothing or who might find it burdensome to comply with specific dress standards.

Implications:

The memorandum recognizes that ordering employees to wear and refrain from wearing certain articles of clothing might be deemed authoritarian. So the author anticipates resistance by thanking the reader in the first paragraph for cooperating with the dress code standards and reminding employees of the importance of the dress code under employment regulations.

Memorandum Three

Purpose:

The memorandum directs the heads of executive offices and agencies in the United States government to place more emphasis on hiring women.

Question:

The memorandum addresses the question of how the White House can improve its record on hiring qualified female applicants. The memorandum acknowledges the complexity of the issue by acknowledging commissions still must be conducted on the manner. However, the memorandum does not consider complex factors that might prevent officials from immediately making changes to their hiring and appointment practices.

Information:

The author clearly outlines the problem he is addressing, which is that there is a dearth of female candidates filling key roles in the federal government and within his own administration. The author explains what official steps are being taken to remedy the problem. However, the author does not link the recommendations or other claims to established research or prior commission findings on the issue.

Concepts:

The most fundamental concept that the author considers is that proactive steps must be taken to increase the representation of women in his administration.

Assumptions:

The author assumed that each individual who reads the memorandum will be able to implement the actions he identifies. For example, the first mandated action requires that each individual will have the time and resources to develop action plans for attracting qualified female appointees. The author assumes that each reader will be in the position to make the changes without considering the reader’s capabilities.

Inferences:

The inference made is that the current practices of the administrative heads who are reading the memo are inadequate for ensuring diverse representation and gender equality of appointees. Thus, the President concludes the memo by stating that he will have special assistant advise with each reader to assess their shortcomings in their efforts to hire and promote women to top positions.

Point of View:

The memorandum is written from a single point of view. The President holds the perspective that more steps need to be taken to increase the number of qualified women serving in mid-level and top government positions. He demonstrates the belief that hiring practices are at fault and does not assess other avenues that can be taken to increase the representation of females.

Implications:

A primary consequence is that the reader might lack the resources or willingness to make the recommended changes. In anticipation, the President appoints an assistant to meet with each reader of the memo and help him or her implement the suggested changes. Thus, the President does consider that resistance to making the changes will be the primary consequence of the memo recommendations.

I chose the style of Memorandum One for my submission, even though my memorandum is not directive or informative in nature. Memorandum One is the most professional and modern in appearance. The use of letterhead lends credibility to the content, as does the more up-to-date presentation. I found the extra spaces in the headings to be distracting, so I reduced them.

References

Agulto, M. (2012, May 17). Time schedule. UPM Memorandum. Retrieved from http://www.upm.edu.ph.

Mascaro, M. (2008, April 24). Dress code policy. Gawker. Retrieved from http://img.gawkerassets.com.

Nixon, R. (1971, April 21). Prologue: Pieces of history. A Matter of Simple Justice. Retrieved from http://blogs.archives.gov.