原文核对：2026-10-13 · 中文正文 · 英文提示词与演示
场景定位
综合研究、计划、模型、仪表盘和讨论，区分证据与解释，形成带来源的管理层决策备忘录。
- 难度
- 中级
- 时间跨度
- 1 小时
适合用于
- 结合内部证据、外部研究、预算与取舍的决策。
- 需要证据链和决策日志的计划或投资问题。
- 希望审阅前明确替代方案、负责人确认和风险的团队。
相关工具
读取获准复盘、计划、模型和来源。
Google Drive ↗检查 Notion 决策历史、研究和项目背景。
Notion ↗审阅获准频道中的争论、评论和问题。
Slack ↗验证财务、KPI 和情景输入。
生成可编辑简明备忘录和带来源的预读包。
起步提示词
英文原文 · 可复制后按实际材料修改
I'm deciding whether [team or company] should [decision].
Use these sources:
- prior recaps and research: [files or links]
- planning docs, models, and dashboards: [files or links]
- audience, account, or market context: [files or links]
- stakeholder comments and meeting notes: [files, channels, or thread links]
- budget guardrails: [files or links]
- decision criteria: [criteria]
If I ask for web research, keep external findings separate from internal evidence. Write a concise decision memo with a recommendation, supporting evidence, alternatives and tradeoffs, costs, risks, a decision log, open questions, owner confirmations, and source links.
If the audience needs a pre-read, organize the memo and supporting analysis into a review-ready packet while keeping the memo as the source of truth. Flag assumptions and do not make the decision or share the output.先定义决策
明确选择、约束、受众、决策日期和审批边界；先提供内部资料，再指出需单独补充的外部研究。
- 说明决策、决策者、时间和标准。
- 上传复盘、计划、模型、仪表盘、预算边界、评论和会议笔记。
- 盘点内部证据、缺口、争论和要求的网页研究。
- 审阅建议、替代方案、取舍、风险、决策日志和缺失信息。
- 进入管理层审阅前核实重要主张及负责人确认。
内证、外部研究和解释分章呈现。无法确认的成本、日期或市场事实明确列为开放项；长预读以备忘录为准，支持分析放附录，不用精美幻灯片掩盖不确定性。
检验建议与审阅包
挑战首选方案，指出哪些假设会改变建议，并预判决策者问题。
官方提示词
英文原文 · 可复制后按实际材料修改
Pressure-test the decision memo.
Show:
- the assumptions that drive the recommendation
- the strongest case for each alternative
- evidence that is internal versus external
- costs, risks, and missing information that could change the decision
- claims, numbers, and owner confirmations that still need review
- questions a skeptical decision maker is likely to ask
- the smallest additional analysis needed to reduce uncertainty
Keep the original memo unchanged, cite the relevant source for each finding, and mark every proposed revision for review.展开英文原文对照
Give ChatGPT research, planning documents, models, dashboards, stakeholder context, and unresolved questions, then ask it to separate evidence from interpretation and draft a sourced decision memo that is ready for leadership review.
Define the decision before gathering evidence
Decision work becomes clearer when ChatGPT knows the choice, constraints, audience, decision date, and approval boundary. Attach internal context first, then identify any outside research that needs to be completed separately.
- State the decision, decision maker, timing, and criteria.
- Attach recaps, planning docs, models, dashboards, budget guardrails, stakeholder comments, and meeting notes.
- Ask ChatGPT to inventory internal evidence, source gaps, unresolved debate, and requested web research.
- Run the starter prompt and review the recommendation, alternatives, tradeoffs, risks, decision log, and missing information.
- Verify each material claim and owner confirmation before the memo enters leadership review.
Keep internal evidence, external research, and interpretation in separate sections. If a cost, date, or market fact cannot be confirmed, leave it as an explicit open item. When the audience needs a longer pre-read, keep the decision memo as the source of truth and place supporting analysis in an appendix instead of hiding uncertainty in polished slides.
Pressure-test the recommendation and review packet
Use a follow-up pass to challenge the preferred option, expose which assumptions would change the recommendation, and anticipate the questions decision makers will ask.
官方提示词
英文原文 · 可复制后按实际材料修改
Pressure-test the decision memo.
Show:
- the assumptions that drive the recommendation
- the strongest case for each alternative
- evidence that is internal versus external
- costs, risks, and missing information that could change the decision
- claims, numbers, and owner confirmations that still need review
- questions a skeptical decision maker is likely to ask
- the smallest additional analysis needed to reduce uncertainty
Keep the original memo unchanged, cite the relevant source for each finding, and mark every proposed revision for review.