Format of Memos
- Thread starter Pikache
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 79
- Points
- 680
Your memo should be in the following format (see attached file),
The example attached uses a distruibution list but if you are addressing it to one person use their title/appointment.
Example: 1 Tp TC or 1 Sect Comd
EDITED TO ADD
I will try and post an example from the CFSAL Writing Guide tonight......
The example attached uses a distruibution list but if you are addressing it to one person use their title/appointment.
Example: 1 Tp TC or 1 Sect Comd
EDITED TO ADD
I will try and post an example from the CFSAL Writing Guide tonight......
- Reaction score
- 365
- Points
- 930
ballz said:
You might have missed it. It was taught to me in BOTC II (post BOTC [Chilliwack] and pre-MARS II. it was a single day of all military correspondence - memos, letters (official and demi-official - to civilian and military addressees), messages, etc. Just enough time to confuse us.
NFLD Sapper said:
Can you (should you?) not use standard abbreviations, such as 'Refs' vice 'References'?
- Reaction score
- 79
- Points
- 680
MARS that's why I am going to verify it with the CFSAL Writing Guide.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
NFLD Sapper said:
You do realize that the CFSAL Writing Guide carries no weight outside of CFSAL, right?
Until someone high enough up the food chain realizes the monumental mistake that was made when the CF-wide standard for Military Writing was tossed in the circular file, there are going to be as many standards for memos/letters/etc. as there are units in the CF.
- Reaction score
- 79
- Points
- 680
Well the memo contained within the Resource Management Support Clerk Apprentice Training Military Writing Guide seems to be the standard I have seen on on my Leadership Course, done within my Unit, sent from other units and, also done at CFSME... and it does conform to A-AD-121-CO1/FP-000 Staff and Writing Procedures.......
A
aesop081
Guest
Occam said:
Carries enough weight outside of CFSAL to be used to teach Sr. NCOs on the IAEQ course........
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
NFLD Sapper said:
Has anyone pointed out to the staff at CFSAL that the RMS Clerk Apprentice Training Military Writing Guide references A-AD-121-CO/FP-000, which is an obsolete document? If you search for that pub on the DWAN, you'll arrive at a nice webpage which informs everyone that it is obsolete* and has been rescinded.
Sorry, but this is a real stick in my craw. When the "A-AD-121-CO1/FP-000 Staff and Writing Procedures" was made obsolete, it seems that the thing to do was copy and paste the text into a new document, put a nice cover page on it which says "RMS Clerk Apprentice Training Military Writing Guide", or "XXXXXXX unit Military Writing Guide", or whatever. Who authorized the "rebranding" of an obsolete document into something to be passed off as official?
We had a Forces-wide standard for Military Writing. Someone, in their infinite wisdom, decided to make it obsolete, and leave nothing in its place for guidance. Everyone's solution was to take snippets from the obsolete document, and a little of their own style, and make unit/branch/trade/school Writing Guides out of it. So now, what we have, is no standard at all, and people getting jacked up and having memos returned to them with red pen scribbles because they wrote memos the way their last unit wanted it. What a waste of everyone's time.
We have three volumes of QR&Os, a hockeysock full of DAODs (and growing), a whack of CFAOs that are still in effect, and God knows how many CBIs. Surely to Christ someone can draft up a national standard for writing a bloody memo or service letter.
/rant off
*obsolete - 1 a : no longer in use or no longer useful <an obsolete word> b : of a kind or style no longer current
CDN Aviator said:
That only goes to show how quickly something which looks real pretty (but still lacks official sanction) can propagate to some units and not others, in the absence of something official. Does it have an NDID number? It seems to be lacking the statement that is on the front page of just about every CF publication which states "Issued on Authority of the Chief of the Defence Staff".
- Reaction score
- 79
- Points
- 680
Occam said:
Well since you seem to be the SME on everything how about showing us the perfect example of a memo and also what you used and is it sanctioned....
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
NFLD Sapper said:
I am not the SME on everything, but I have been around long enough to see how smoothly everything worked when we had a CF-wide standard for military writing. My JLC 17 years ago drilled all that into me. Now, just getting a memo staffed to the CO takes at least three rewrites because everyone is using a different reference. I'm sure everyone in the chain has better things that they would rather be doing than the old hack 'n slash with the red pen.
The next memo I write will be a release memo, and unless someone wants to get into it with me over how many blank lines go between the body and the signature block, it's going up the chain as is.
- Reaction score
- 27,534
- Points
- 1,090
Occam said:
The lack of standards is a huge challenge (and not just in military writing).
And re: your release meemo. I did see one (military) boss return a letter from a civilian subordinate, announcing they were moving to a new position, red-penned for correction. So don`t count on it not happening (though he is now retired)...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Occam said:
On the RMS Clk QL3, we are taught to leave 5 blank lines b/w the body and sig block.
- Reaction score
- 1,714
- Points
- 1,260
That is what I was taught also, eons ago. The proplem that Occam is bringing up is that since A-AD-121-CO/FP-000 does not exist means that there is no officle policy saying 5 blank sentances. Any Comd or unit can come out with a new policy, say 7 blank sentances and there is nothing to stop him. It is usually not a big deal as most units still follow A-AD-121-CO/FP-000 even if it does not exist, but it can be frustrating having something returned to you when you wrote it the way you were taught.
- Reaction score
- 365
- Points
- 930
dangerboy said:
Is there anything inherently wrong with that? My understanding of memoranda is that they are a form of unit-level correspondence only - never addressed to anyone higher than the CO. If something needs to leave the unit, then it is written as a letter, devoid of abbreviations and such.
So, what is precluding the CO from establishing his or her own format? My last CO did just that. Then he turned to me, his XO and directed me to see that it was disseminated throughout the Ship. I should have assigned the task to a SLt - not one rank higher - but since there were none around; I did what amounted to no more than 1 hour of staff work. I wrote a sample memo, attached an SOP, complete with screen shots of how to use the MS formatting toolbar (the CO wanted the margins changed as well), and then posted it to our server. I then sent an email to all of the Department Heads and Departmental Chiefs with a link to the new aid memoire. I inserted an item into ROs and posted a copy of the memo next to ROs - for those without regular IT access. Total time: about 45 minutes. So yeah, when the odd memo arrived on my desk for furtherance to the CO, I took a red pen to it if required, but only because we had established and promulgated the standard for drafters to refer to. That is all that is required: someone, at some level to promulgate some standard. Without that very minor bit of work, then yeah, i agree with Occam - red penning a memo is bull_____.
So what if someone transfers to another unit and has to learn that oh, we are only using 4 spaces here? Big deal. Hence the saying in the Navy: “Different Ships, Different cap tallies.”
Cheers,
MARS
- Reaction score
- 2,849
- Points
- 940
Must be sweet having sufficient free time to concentrate on the thorny issue of a personalized memo formatMARS said:
- Reaction score
- 27,534
- Points
- 1,090
Each unit having its own standard sort of defeats the purpose of having, oh, a standard.
Having a single standard facilitates instruction and administration.
But that is merely my (non-standrad) opinion.
Having a single standard facilitates instruction and administration.
But that is merely my (non-standrad) opinion.
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,120
- Points
- 1,010
Ideally a memo shouldn't leave a single chain of command, but what happens when it is requesting administrative action and then the member is posted. I am sure that if the new CO is someone petty enough to worry about the format, note I say format not legibility, of a memo they would be petty enough to insist that the memo be resubmitted in "their" format.
I'm with dap and JM on this. Either have a standard, or simply accept the fact there is no standard and instead have the concept of memo in that, if you can clear, concise, legible, submitted up the CoC correctly and not insubordinate, any form of communication could be treated as a memo.
I'm with dap and JM on this. Either have a standard, or simply accept the fact there is no standard and instead have the concept of memo in that, if you can clear, concise, legible, submitted up the CoC correctly and not insubordinate, any form of communication could be treated as a memo.
- Reaction score
- 4,269
- Points
- 1,260
Bumped with something I found online at a Government of Canada page -- a fill-out-able PDF for a memo.
If this is of any use to you, feel free to download & share.
If it doesn't fit the formats you're working with, let me know and I'll delete the post.
If this is of any use to you, feel free to download & share.
If it doesn't fit the formats you're working with, let me know and I'll delete the post.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 410
milnews.ca said:
I've seen the GC22 before and in it's original form (ie; paper based) it came with three pre-carbonized pages (White, Pink and Yellow) and was used primarily by OGD's but not the CAF. It allowed you to hand write an internal memo, tear off the last page (Yellow copy) for your records and send it off to the recipient. The recipient could respond back by writing on the front page and then tear off the 2nd page (Pink copy) and return the original (White page) back to the originator for action/info. Pretty much a pre-cursor to email requests but it does still get used by some GoC Departments.
