Answer first, then why.

LEVEL 1 · THE ANSWER The short answer

Start with your answer. Then give the few reasons that support it. Put the proof under each reason.

That's the whole method. Short on time? You can stop here.

LEVEL 2 · THE REASONS Why it works

This page is built the same way. The answer is at the top, these three reasons are under it, and the proof for each one is below. Read on only for the reasons you want proved.

LEVEL 3 · THE PROOF See it in one memo

The clip takes a recommendation memo written in the order the work happened. Watch where the decision is in the first version, and where it ends up.

PROOF FOR REASON 1 The reader gets the point first

Here's the memo from the clip, as it was first written. It tells the story of the work, in order.

The reader gets five lines of history before they learn what they're being asked to decide. Then they have to go back and work out which lines were the reasons.

Here's the same memo in pyramid order. Same facts. Nothing was added.

The first two sentences give the context. The third is the decision. Everything after it is support, so the reader can stop as soon as they're convinced. Drawn as a picture, it's a pyramid:

PROOF FOR REASON 2 Grouped reasons are easy to check

Under the answer go the reasons it rests on. The pyramid has rules for how ideas relate, up and down and side to side. In short:

• Each idea sums up the ideas under it. The answer sums up the reasons. Each reason sums up its proof.
• The ideas in a group are the same kind of idea. Here, all three are reasons to buy.
• The ideas in a group are in a logical order. Here: cost, then whether we can pay, then the risks.

Then check the group for overlaps and gaps. Consultants call this MECE: mutually exclusive (no overlaps) and collectively exhaustive (no gaps). Here's the first try at the van memo's reasons:

Two things were wrong. "The lease is up 30%" says the same thing as "It costs less." It's proof for the cost reason, so it moves down a level. And nothing answered the first thing a director will ask: can we afford it? Filling that gap made the group complete.

Minto's own course description puts the test plainly. When you write "there are three reasons for making this change," make sure there are in fact only three, that they're the right three, and that you've drawn the point they add up to. In her words: "'There are three reasons' is not an appropriate insight!"

PROOF FOR REASON 3 The opening sets up the question

Don't open with the answer cold. Open with a few lines the reader already accepts, so the answer has something to land on. Minto calls this the Situation, Complication, Question framework (SCQ):

• Situation. Something the reader already knows and agrees with.
• Complication. What changed, or what's wrong. It's the reason you're writing.
• Question. The question the complication raises. Often you don't need to write it out, because the reader is already asking it.

Your answer to that question is the top of the pyramid. Here's the van memo's opening:

Keep the opening short. In a memo it's two or three sentences. It reminds the reader of what they know. If it needs a page, it's not something they already know.

Write this way

1. Name the reader and their question. Write the one question this document answers for them, in their words.
2. Write your answer. One or two sentences. It goes at the top.
3. Ask "why?" of your answer. The replies are your reasons. Keep two to five.
4. Check the group. No two reasons say the same thing. Nothing the reader will ask is missing. Proof that crept in as a reason moves down a level.
5. Put the proof under each reason. Numbers, facts and sources.
6. Write the opening last. Situation, complication, then the answer.
7. Test it. Give someone only the first paragraph. Can they tell you what you want, and why?

Ask your agent

Rewrite the text below using Barbara Minto's Pyramid Principle.
1. Identify the reader and the one question this document must answer for them.
2. Open with two or three sentences: the situation the reader already accepts, then the complication.
3. Then give the answer to the question in one or two sentences.
4. Under the answer, give two to five reasons. They must not overlap, and together they must cover what the reader will ask. Put them in a logical order.
5. Under each reason, give its proof: the facts, numbers and sources from the text.
6. Don't add facts that aren't in the text. If a reason has no proof, say so.
Then show the structure as an outline (answer, reasons, proof) so I can check the grouping.

Text:
[paste here]

What good output looks like: the decision in the first paragraph, reasons a reader could list from memory, and an outline where nothing appears twice.