"Memo Writing for ME 263: Part 1", by Zachary Koppelmann.
You are judged by your written communication.
If your writing is unclear, sloppy, or unprofessional,
your work may be viewed as useless.
Results mean nothing if your audience does not understand what you did.
This vidcast is designed to revise a poor memo
into a more effective memo.
Here is the first sample.
The intended purpose of this memo is to explain the processes by which this weeks activities and in-activities were determined,
and present the results of said activities and in-activities.
This sample is poorly written because it says nothing.
Your audience has no clear idea of what is being talked about,
what project, or why they are reading this.
Your audience needs to know exactly what is going on,
with what, and why they are reading.
Time is everything.
Be precise, be direct, be specific, be concise.
Another issue is more subtle:
Correct does not mean effective.
This sample is grammatically correct,
but it still doesn't work.
Precision, directness, specificity, and concision
are what makes effective professional writing.
Here is the revision:
This memo is the weekly report for the Stair-Right project.
The revision is precise, direct, specific, and concise.
Your audience has everything it needs to understand the memo and its purpose.
Saying "the purpose of this memo" is a great way to start.
Here is the second sample.
This week, the project was continued without any outside interference.
Data from previous weeks was used to best determine the method of enhancing potential weakness in the prospective design.
This sample is unclear because the audience doesn't know
what project, why there might be outside interference,
what data and tests, and what weaknesses.
This sample says nothing.
Your audience is not on your team.
Your audience has not been focusing on your project.
Your audience has limited time and multiple projects.
You need to give enough information for your audience
to remember the project, understand your comments, and know what they need to do.
Here is the revision.
The Stair-Right project is slightly behind schedule due to a weakness discovered during the Phase 2 Stress Testing, iteration 3 (Phase 2 Stress Testing Results).
The revision immediately situates the audience
into the specific project and concerns,
specific terms and names are used,
as well as providing a reference to the actual test results.
The entire data set is not given, nor are the specific figures.
That is in the data set, which is attached.
If your audience wants to review the exact numbers, they can,
but they have enough information to understand what is going on and why.
Here is the third sample.
Many factors were considered and reviewed before a working solution was selected.
Based on the results of the research and small-scale tests, we decided to increase the thickness of the secondary support bar to prevent the previously observed failures.
Please review the attached revised schematic.
This sample provides more details,
and, if your audience had been working closely with the project,
they might understand what is going on.
However, it is still vague and imprecise.
What failures? What research? What tests?
This information will be clear to you and your team because you did it.
Your audience did not and therefore may not have any idea what you are talking about.
Here is the revision.
After analyzing the broken prototype, it was determines that increasing the thickness of the secondary support bar
(item 25 on the Stair-Right Schematic) would prevent similar failures.
By this time, the pattern should be emerging:
The revision is more precise, more direct, more specific, and more concise.
It uses specific names and terms,
refers to exact locations and items.
It gives your audience what is needed.
The three examples of revision show a progression of becoming more effective writing.
The samples are vague, rely on inside knowledge, and leave more questions.
The revisions get straight to the point,
with enough detail for the audience to understand what happened,
why, and what needs to happen.
The next episodes will be more examples and revisions.
If you have any questions, please contact your TA.
This has been a presentation of Memo Writing for ME 263, Part 1,
a vidcast brought to you by Zachary Koppelmann,
in cooperation with the Purdue Online Writing Lab
and prepared for the Mechanical Engineering Writing Enhancement Program.