<!--
Author: Simon-Pierre Boucher
Contact: contact@spboucher.ai
-->

# Examples — Professional Email House Style

## Contents
- Subject-line pairs
- Complete worked example: request email (bad → house style)
- Complete worked example: bad-news email (bad → house style)
- Follow-up sequence without passive aggression
- Gotchas

## Subject-line pairs

| ❌ Never | ✅ House style |
|---|---|
| Quick question | Need your call: ship Friday or wait for QA? |
| Update | Launch moved to Sept 12 — no action needed |
| Meeting | Can you join a 30-min pricing review Thu 2pm? |
| Following up | Reminder: contract signature due tomorrow |
| Important!!! | Server costs up 40% — decision needed by EOM |

## Complete worked example: request email

**❌ Bad version (context-first, buried ask, no next step):**

> Subject: Question
>
> Hi Sarah,
>
> Hope you're doing well! As you know, we've been working on the vendor
> evaluation for the past few weeks. The team looked at five options and
> narrowed it down to two. There were a lot of considerations around pricing,
> support SLAs, and integration effort, and honestly it was a close call.
> After several discussions we're leaning toward Acme, though DataCo has
> some advantages too. Anyway, I was wondering if you might have some time
> to maybe look this over when you get a chance?
>
> Thanks!

**✅ House-style version:**

> Subject: Approval needed by Thu: Acme as our data vendor ($36k/yr)
>
> Hi Sarah,
>
> Can you approve Acme as our data vendor by **Thursday 5pm**? Their quote
> expires Friday.
>
> Why Acme over DataCo:
> - 20% cheaper at our volume ($36k vs $45k/yr)
> - 24h support SLA vs business-hours only
> - Integration estimated at 2 days vs 2 weeks
>
> Full comparison attached. Next step: on your approval I'll sign Thursday
> and kick off integration Monday.
>
> Best,
> Simon

## Complete worked example: bad-news email

**❌ Bad version (buried, vague, blame-shifting):**

> Subject: Project update
>
> Hi all, lots of moving parts lately! The team has been heads-down and
> we've made real progress on several fronts. That said, given some
> dependencies outside our control and a few unexpected challenges, the
> timeline may need to be revisited somewhat...

**✅ House-style version:**

> Subject: Launch slips 2 weeks to Oct 3 — mitigation below
>
> Hi all,
>
> The launch moves from Sept 19 to **Oct 3**. Cause: the payment-provider
> API migration returned breaking changes we discovered in integration
> testing on Tuesday.
>
> Mitigation:
> - Beta customers keep the Sept 19 date on the legacy flow
> - Marketing holds the announcement until Sept 26
>
> Next step: I'll confirm the new date is solid at Friday's checkpoint and
> report here by 3pm.

## Follow-up sequence without passive aggression

- Follow-up 1 (day 3): "Resending — I need your sign-off by Wed to keep the
  Friday ship date."
- Follow-up 2 (day 5): "Deadline risk: without sign-off today, ship moves to
  next sprint. Reply 'go' and I'll handle the rest."
- Escalation (day 6, new thread, manager CC'd): facts and dates only:
  "Sign-off requested Aug 1, followed up Aug 4 and Aug 6; ship date at risk."

## Gotchas

- **"Hope you're well" openers** — harmless once, filler when the ask is
  urgent. If the email fits on one screen with it, keep it; otherwise cut.
- **Bold more than one thing** and nothing is bold. One bolded element per email.
- **Questions hidden in statements** ("It would be great to know the budget")
  get no answers. Ask directly with a question mark.
- **CC as pressure** reads as hostile. CC managers only with a stated reason
  ("CC Dana for visibility on the date change").
- **Attachment amnesia** — name the attachment in the body ("comparison
  attached") so its absence is caught before sending.