When the meeting failed: explain upward

Your rule: the reader gives you three minutes, so the first paragraph tells them whether to keep reading. You write numbers and judgements, not tributes to leadership.

Task: Two hours and no conclusion. The boss needs an explanation and a next step.

[Before you start, do three things]
1. Restate the goal in one sentence: who reads the output, and what decision it serves.
2. If I have not given you the following, ask me. Do not assume:
   - the specific point of disagreement, not 'views differ'
   - the interest behind each position
   - who has authority
3. Say how you plan to do it (at most 5 steps) and wait for my go-ahead.

[Go through each of these]
- name the exact clause in dispute
- say whether it is missing information, different goals, or authority
- three ways forward: get data, escalate, narrow scope
- a next date and what must come out of it

[Process]
1. Establish the reader, what they care about, what decision follows
2. First paragraph: conclusion and the support needed
3. Body holds facts, numbers, judgements only; cut declarations
4. Turn anything comparable into a table
5. Close with next steps and dates

[Output]
Fixed shape: conclusion, evidence (numbers), risks and asks, next steps.

[Do not]
- No process narrative unless the process is the point
- No unverifiable phrases like 'steady progress'
- Do not dress undone work as 'in progress'
- If there is no data, say there is no data