Separate decisions, proposals and actions in meeting notes

A meeting summary can accidentally turn a suggestion into an instruction. Start with this short, complete excerpt and build a decision note plus an action register. It practises one checking skill for longer documents; it does not test long-document processing.

Practice goal: Produce a faithful decision note and action table that distinguish approval, a proposal, an assigned task and a conditional next step.

Use only the invented information below. Do not paste real emails, personnel records, customer details or confidential office documents. Changing a name does not establish permission to upload a real record.

• [M1] Fictional Elm Office planning meeting, October 12. Decision: keep the current shared filing structure for the next month. No software purchase was approved.
• [M2] Proposal only: one participant suggested moving to a new filing tool. The team did not decide to trial or buy it.
• [M3] Assigned action: Operations will list the three most frequent filing problems by October 16. The notes do not name an individual owner within Operations.
• [M4] Assigned action: the office manager will collect two tool descriptions. No deadline was recorded for that task.
• [M5] Conditional next step: after the problem list is available, the office manager may propose a trial for approval. A trial is not authorized now.
• [M6] A follow-up meeting was discussed, but no date, time or room was agreed. These notes supply no budget or reason for keeping the current structure.
• [M7] Prepare text only. Do not create calendar events, assign real tasks, contact suppliers or change any files.

You can complete this on paper or in a local document. No external account, upload or purchase is needed.

Draft your answer before reading the correction. Optional: use only this fictional prompt in a tool your organization permits. Do not connect accounts, upload other files or send messages for this task.

Using only M1–M7 below, write a decision note, a separate proposal note, and a Markdown action table with Task, Owner, Deadline and Source columns. Include only the two assigned actions as table rows. Label the conditional next step separately. List missing owner/deadline/meeting/budget information without guessing. Do not convert a proposal or “may propose” into approval.

Complete fictional facts:
- [M1] Fictional Elm Office planning meeting, October 12. Decision: keep the current shared filing structure for the next month. No software purchase was approved.
- [M2] Proposal only: one participant suggested moving to a new filing tool. The team did not decide to trial or buy it.
- [M3] Assigned action: Operations will list the three most frequent filing problems by October 16. The notes do not name an individual owner within Operations.
- [M4] Assigned action: the office manager will collect two tool descriptions. No deadline was recorded for that task.
- [M5] Conditional next step: after the problem list is available, the office manager may propose a trial for approval. A trial is not authorized now.
- [M6] A follow-up meeting was discussed, but no date, time or room was agreed. These notes supply no budget or reason for keeping the current structure.
- [M7] Prepare text only. Do not create calendar events, assign real tasks, contact suppliers or change any files.

Authored flawed sample, not an actual provider response:

The team approved buying the new tool next month. Alex will finish a trial by October 16. The office manager will choose the vendor by October 16. The next meeting is Friday at 10:00 in Room 2.

1. M1 keeps the current structure for the next month and approves no purchase. M2 is only a suggestion; the sample reverses that decision.

2. M3 assigns Operations a problem list by October 16. It does not assign Alex or a trial. Preserve the team owner and flag the missing individual rather than naming one.

3. M4 assigns the office manager two descriptions, not a vendor choice. It records no deadline. October 16 belongs only to the problem-list task.

4. M5 allows a future proposal after the list is available; it does not authorize a trial. Keep the dependency and the need for approval visible.

5. M6 supplies no follow-up date, time, room, budget or reason. The sample invents the meeting details. Mark the gaps and ask the meeting owner to confirm them.

One supported correction:

Decision: Keep the current shared filing structure for the next month; no software purchase was approved (M1).

Proposal: A move to a new filing tool was suggested, but no trial or purchase was decided (M2).

Conditional next step: After the problem list is available, the office manager may propose a trial for approval. There is no current trial authorization (M5).

Confirm separately: the individual within Operations, the descriptions deadline, follow-up date/time/room, budget and reason for retaining the current structure are not supplied. Do not fill these gaps by inference (M3–M6). Nothing is scheduled, purchased or changed in this exercise (M7).

Check your answer:

• The current structure remains for the next month; no purchase or trial approval is invented.
• The action table has exactly the two assigned tasks; the proposal and conditional next step remain outside it.
• Operations owns the problem list due October 16; no individual name is invented.
• The office manager collects two descriptions with deadline not recorded; the other task’s deadline is not copied.
• The condition and approval requirement remain visible; missing meeting and budget details are flagged, not scheduled or promised.

Different wording can satisfy these checks. Recheck the facts after any rewrite.

For a longer authorized record, inventory every relevant section before drafting and keep a source reference for each action. Check uncertain transcription or scanned text against the original. A neat summary is not proof that the meeting record itself is accurate. Ask the responsible meeting owner to resolve ambiguity; do not let an assistant silently create commitments.

Primary guidance checked on 2026-10-12. The references support source checking, privacy boundaries and clear presentation; the office facts and sample answers are invented. UK government guidance is cited for its scoped practice advice, not as a rule applying to every workplace.

• Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile
• Artificial Intelligence Playbook for the UK Government
• Use Clear and Understandable Content

Keep real work within your organization’s approved data and review process. These exercises do not establish tested accessibility, time savings, job competence or a professional qualification. No provider trial or human professional review is claimed.

Start free Module 1: account sign-in is required; no card is needed. Or read general AI learning guidance. Keep your practice answer in your own local document if you want to return to it; this page does not save it to your account.