A decision that lives only in a meeting thread has no single question, no named criteria, and often no next action. It is discussed in the meeting, in the thread, and in the margins of a document, and then the options, the tests, and the actual choice never sit in one place. When someone asks “why did we pick this?”, the trail is a conversation, not a record. A week later, the group can remember that a choice was made and still be unable to say which question it answered, or who does what now.
Options written before criteria make the problem worse. Hidden tests appear after the fact, and the choice cannot be explained. A choice recorded as “option A feels right” is a preference, not a decision you can brief. Two questions squeezed onto one map make the choice unclean, because you cannot tell which question the choice is for. A go / no-go / wait decision gets forced into a multi-option shape, or a multi-option choice gets forced into a go / no-go template, and the map starts lying about what kind of decision it is. The map stops at the choice and never names who does what next, or by when.
The Decision Map Template Pack (for Freeplane) gives you two blank Freeplane maps and one filled, labeled example so you can write the decision as a map: one question, context, criteria or gates, options, a choice that names the criteria it meets, and a next action, recorded in the same sitting. It is written for Freeplane 1.13.x — 1.13.5 was current on 11 November 2026 — and the .mm files are Freeplane XML with map version="freeplane 1.13.0". The kit does not include the Freeplane application. The maps were checked as well-formed Freeplane XML when the kit was built. Opening them in Freeplane 1.13.x is your step, and the guide says so.
What is the shape of a decision that can be briefed later?
The method rule is short, and it is the whole point of the pack. Context, then Criteria or Gates, then Options. Choice and Next action are filled in the same sitting. One question per map.
That order is not a taste in layout. Writing options before criteria is how hidden criteria sneak in after the fact. You look at the options, you notice a test you had not named, and then the choice is justified by a standard nobody agreed to at the start. The map will still look complete. It will not be a record of the decision you thought you were making.
The choice node has a rule of its own. The “because” should mention at least one criterion, or gate, by name. “Option A feels right” does not belong on this map. “Option A is the only option that meets Criterion 1 and 2 together” does. The kit records a decision in a shape you can reopen. Making the right call is still your job. The map’s job is to make the question, the tests, the options, the choice, and the next action visible in one place.
A map with a choice and no next action is unfinished. A decision that does not say who does what next, and by when, will have to be reconstructed the next time someone asks what happens now. Fill Choice and Next action in the same sitting, while the room still remembers both.
Why criteria before options, and why one question per map?
Three older habits of recording a choice make the same demand, and they are all stricter than a thread.
Benjamin Franklin, in a 1772 letter to Joseph Priestley, described a method of lining up reasons for and against a decision and weighing them. The useful part is not the arithmetic. It is that the reasons are written down as reasons, before the choice is treated as obvious. A pro and a con that exist only in conversation have a way of rearranging themselves after the fact. A written list is harder to rearrange after the fact, including when you are the one tempted to rearrange it.
Architectural design competitions have long published the criteria before the schemes are judged. The jury is not supposed to discover, halfway through, that daylight or circulation or cost was the real test. If the criteria are not named first, the winning scheme is an aesthetic event, not a decision you can defend to the people who have to build it.
Maritime practice made a third, narrower version of the same idea for a different kind of choice. A go / no-go / wait decision about whether a ship is ready to sail is not a comparison of three attractive destinations. The question is whether to proceed, and the tests are gates: conditions that must be true, and any deal-breaker. Forcing that decision into a multi-option map, or forcing a multi-option choice into a go / no-go shape, is how the record starts answering the wrong question.
A Freeplane map is in the same position. One question per map. If you have two questions, you have two maps. Criteria or gates before options. And a go / no-go / wait decision gets its own template, because it is a different shape.
What, exactly, is in the two templates?
The zip is a 4-page guide, two blank maps, one filled fictional example, and a README. The guide covers the map shape, the first hour, a rule for the choice node, and a walkthrough of the fictional example.
Decision-template.mm is the blank multi-option template. Use it when more than one option is on the table and you will choose against named criteria. The branches are already placed. Under “The question,” you write the decision as one question. Under “Context,” why a choice is needed, and any deadline or trigger. Under “Criteria,” what “good” means — three is a working default; add a fourth only if it would change the choice. Under “Options,” one child node per option, and under each: how it meets each criterion, a cost, time, or risk line, and any open question. A status attribute starts as open. Under “Choice,” the option you chose, or “not yet,” and a short because tied to the criteria; status moves to decided when you have it. Under “Next action,” owner, action, and when.
Go-no-go-template.mm is the blank go / no-go / wait template. Use it when the question is whether to proceed, not which of several designs to pick. “The question” is of the form “Should we proceed with X?” “Context” says what “go” would start, and what happens if you wait. “Gates” are the conditions that must be true for a go, and any deal-breaker. Under “Go / No-go / Wait,” you write evidence, not slogans. “Choice” is go, no-go, or wait — and because. “Next action” is again owner, action, and when.
The maps include simple attributes, role and status, on the key nodes so you can later filter in Freeplane if you use attributes and filters. You can ignore the attributes on Day 1 and still have a complete decision record.
EXAMPLE-Northshore-hall-decision-FICTIONAL.mm is a filled, labeled fictional example: a hall-booking decision for a made-up studio. It is fictional. Northshore Studio is choosing a hall for a spring recital. The criteria are a Saturday 16:00 start with an hour of set-up; a piano already in the room, or time to move one; and walking distance or simple parking. Option A, a community hall, meets the first two together. Option B, a school auditorium, misses the start time. Option C, the studio room alone, cannot seat an audience and has only a digital piano. The choice is A. The next action is a named person sending the hold request by 21 November 2026 in the example. Open the example map to see this laid out as nodes rather than as a paragraph. Then write your own. It is not a real booking, and it carries no implied result.
What does the first hour look like?
Install or open Freeplane 1.13.x from official Freeplane sources. Open the fictional example map first and read the criteria, the three options, the choice, and the next action. Then File, then Save as, or start from Decision-template.mm or Go-no-go-template.mm, and save under the name of your real decision. File, then New map from template, is the Freeplane command if you prefer to keep a template in your template folder.
Rewrite “The question” as a single question. If you have two questions, you have two maps. Fill Context, then Criteria or Gates, then Options, in that order. When you choose, fill Choice and Next action in the same sitting. The choice should mention at least one criterion, or gate, by name.
Who is this for, and what is it not?
It is for people who already use Freeplane, or who will open it for this, and who need a repeatable shape for real decisions — booking, hiring, go / no-go, tool choice, and the everyday calls that otherwise vanish into chat. It is a set of original maps and a short guide. It is not an official Freeplane product. Freeplane is a trademark of its trademark owner, and the software is released under the GNU GPL. The kit does not include the Freeplane application.
The value is the shape: criteria before options, one question per map, a second template when the decision is actually go / no-go / wait, a filled example you can read as a map rather than as a paragraph, and a next action recorded with the choice. That is what makes the map useful the next time someone asks why the choice was made, or what happens now.
Open the fictional example first, then save a copy of the template that matches the kind of decision you are actually making. Get the Decision Map Template Pack (for Freeplane), write the criteria before the options, and do not leave the map without a next action.
The Decision Map Template Pack is listed on our Tools for Freeplane page, alongside the rest of the tools in that line. You can browse every Organa Obscura tool on the Products page.
Leave a Reply