Justification/Recommendation Reports

Introduction :

• Justification reports are written to defend changes in policy or procedure.

• They are often written without any request from the reader. The report focuses on answering the question "why should we?"

• Do this by providing supporting evidence and convincing arguments to back the changes your report proposes.

• It analyzes a problem, discuss options, and present a recommendation, Solution, or action to be taken.

• E.g buying equipment, changing the procedure, hiring an employee, consolidating departments, or investing funds.

*Structures: Direct or indirect pattern

Direct is used for non-sensitive topics and recommendations that would be agreeable to readers :

1. In the introduction identify the problem or need briefly.

2. Announce solution or recommendation with action verbs.

3. Explain more fully the benefits of recommendation or steps to be taken.

4. Discuss pros, cons, and cost.

5. Conclude with summary.

Indirect is used when a reader may oppose a recommendation or when suggest caution:

1. General reference to problem

2. Describe the problem or need your recommendation addresses.

-Use specific examples.

3. Discuss alternative solutions.

4. Present the most promising alternative (your recommendation) last.

5. Show advantages of your recommendation.

6. Summarize your recommendation.

7. Ask for authorization to proceed if necessary.

Instructions (how to write the report)

1. Use a basic memo heading (To/From/Date/Subject) and fill it in.

2. Write an opening paragraph that describes the problem or purpose of your report.

3. Write an introduction to your report that details the purpose and significance of your report in more detail.

4. Use the main body of your report to explain how you suggest implementing your recommendations. Provide specific details about the new procedures or solutions.

5. Finish your justification report with a brief summary of your conclusions and recommendations.

OUTLINE :

Memo Information :

• Date, To, From, Subject

• In abbreviate form, indicate the purpose and nature of the report

Introduction :

• Do not include a heading for this section.

• State the purpose of the memo and the nature of the report.

• State how the info gathered to complete the report.

• Not reveal on recommendation until the end of the report.

Significance of problem :

• Include a heading that combine the function and description of the section.

• Fully describe the problem that is being addressed including the background information.

• Use specific example or supporting statistic to describe the significant of the problem.

• In the end of this section, introduce alternatives that will to be discuss in the next section of the report.

Alternative solution :

• Include headings that combine the function and description of each alternative.

• Describe the planning alternatives solution to solve the problem beginning with the lest likely to succeed and including the most promising alternative last.

• Make sure to describe the solution in details, also could include the pros and con of each alternatives.

• Include an estimate of the overall cost of each alternative.

Conclusion :

• Include a heading for this section.

• Justify your upcoming recommendation by approving reasons for your choice.

• Make the recommendation, that is, choose the alternative that will most likely to solve the problem.

EXAMPLE OF RECOMMENDATION REPORT

Date: 2nd November 2006
To: Joseph P.White, Superintendent of Schools
From: David Ayers
Subject: Purchase Recommendations for 8” jointer

Recently, Jim Delallo and I discussed at length the serious problems he was having in operating the jointer at the high schools. Considering that the machine has been under continuous student use for 27 years and has reduced accuracy because of the small table and fence size, I indicated I would contact you regarding a new jointer. You asked that I forward 2006-2007 budget requests by 15th December.

Therefore, I have prepared this recommendation report for choosing a new 8” jointer. Based on lab and catalogue resources and after discussion with other Industrial Arts Teacher in this area, I have narrowed my choices to two: Delta Model DJ-20 and Powermatic Model 60. Each machine has been evaluated using the following criteria, in descending order of importance:

1. Fence size

2. Table length

3. Cost

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the district budget for capital purchase of the Delta Model DJ-20 8” jointer 2006-2007. Selection of the Delta jointer is a departure from the practice of purchasing Powermatic equipment for the woodworking shop. It is my feeling that the Delta jointer is best suited for the current and future needs for the woodworking program.

All elements in the criteria have been met. The slightly higher cost of the Delta, $36.00 is more than offset by increased efficiency and capacity, as noted below.

1. A larger fence size (for better control of stock when squaring)

2. A larger table size (resulting in more efficient planning)

The remainder of the report will compare both machines to the criteria.

CRITERIA

Fence size

The fence serves as a guide for planning face and edge surfaces. The size of the fence, width and length, is directly related to cutting efficiency. The fence size of the jointer currently in operation is 3”x 28”. In purchasing a new jointer the fence size should be increased for improved accuracy and squaring efficiency.

• Delta DJ-20, as Table 1 shows, the Delta fence size is 5”x36”. This represents a 2”x8” increase, which will result in more efficient operations.

• The Powermatic-60 fence is 4”x34”, a 1”x6” increase over that of the existing fence.

Conclusion, both machines exceed the fence size criterion of 3”x28”. Delta DJ-20 has the greatest increase, 2”x8”, and will result in greater squaring accuracy and longitudinal control when jointing edge surfaces.

TABLE 1: 8” Jointer Capabilities Comparison

Criteria Standard DeltaDJ-20 Powermatic-60

Fence size Maximum 3”x28” 5”x36” 4”x34”

Table length Minimum of 52” 76” 64”

Cost Not exceed $2,300 $2,128.00 $2,092.00

Table Length

In-feed and out-feed tables are combined and referred to as table length to as table length. Increased table length improves accuracy when jointing and provides greater stability when planning face surfaces. On the existing machine, the table length is 52”. When planning and jointing stock over 40”, it is difficult to maintain accuracy. To realize improved handling and accuracy on a new jointer, the table length should be above 52”.

• Delta DJ-20, as Table 1 shows, the table length of the Delta is 76”, a 24” increase. This increased size will allow for greater efficiency when planning stock approximately 60”.

• Powermatic-60, as Table 1 shows, the table length of this jointer exceeds the minimum length by 12”. Improved planning can be increased to approximately 50”.

Conclusion, both jointers exceed the 52” minimum table length size. The significant increase in the Delta jointer table length will offer improved planning and jointer accuracy and increase handling capacity.

Cost

The jointer is a capital equipment item and the cost cannot be department budgeted if in excess of $2,300, unless prior approval is granted by the secondary committee. Costs (including shipping, stand and three-phase conversion) are:

• Delta DJ-20: $2,128.00

• Powermatic-60: $2,092.00

Conclusion, both machines meet the third criterion. The Powermatic is slightly lower in cost, but does not have all the capacity and features of the Delta model. The additional cost of the Delta jointer is more than offset by the increase in table and fence size.