Structure It So You're Understood
A clear explanation is not just a matter of simple words: it is, first, a matter of order. The same content, reorganized, can go from "confusing" to "crystal clear." Two principles guide that ordering: start with the conclusion, and respect the limits of your listener's memory.
Start with the answer: the Pyramid Principle
Barbara Minto, a former McKinsey consultant, formalized in The Pyramid Principle a counter-intuitive rule: give the conclusion first, then the arguments that support it. Our instinct pushes us to narrate the journey ("first I looked at this, then that…") before finally reaching the point. But the listener needs the point first in order to know where to file what follows.
This is the idea of BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front), inherited from military writing: the bottom line at the top. You announce the destination, then unfold the route.
flowchart TD
A["Main message<br/>(the conclusion, in one sentence)"] --> B["Argument 1"]
A --> C["Argument 2"]
A --> D["Argument 3"]
B --> B1["Facts / examples"]
C --> C1["Facts / examples"]
D --> D1["Facts / examples"]
Each level answers the "why?" or "how?" raised by the level above. Before you speak, ask yourself: "If I had only one sentence, what would it be?" That is the top of your pyramid.
Respect working memory
The listener has only a very limited working memory. John Sweller formalized in 1988 the cognitive load theory: all learning consumes a scarce mental resource. He distinguishes three loads.
| Load | Origin | What to do with it |
|---|---|---|
| Intrinsic | The inherent difficulty of the topic | Accept it, but break it up into pieces |
| Extraneous | The way it's presented (jargon, disorder, noise) | Reduce it as much as possible: it's waste |
| Germane | Useful effort to understand and connect | Encourage it: that's where learning happens |
The expert's classic mistake is to inflate the extraneous load (convoluted phrasing, abbreviations, digressions) which devours the resource meant for understanding.
Break it up: the power of chunking
In 1956, psychologist George Miller published The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: we hold only about 7 items at a time (recent estimates, such as Nelson Cowan's in 2001, suggest closer to 4). The remedy is called chunking: grouping information into meaningful blocks. A phone number is remembered in groups, not digit by digit. Break your explanation into 3 ideas maximum, each clearly named — the listener will remember the structure before the details.
Say this / don't say that
- Don't say: "So, to understand it you first need to know that… then… and so, finally, in conclusion…" (the conclusion arrives exhausted, at the end)
- Say: "In a word: option B is the best. Here are the three reasons." (top of the pyramid, then three branches)
Practical exercise
Take an explanation you have to give this week (an email, a presentation). Write the conclusion in a single sentence at the top of a page. Below it, list at most three arguments. Anything that doesn't fit this skeleton is either a second-rank detail or noise to be cut.
Summary
Structuring means, first, starting with the conclusion (Barbara Minto's Pyramid Principle, BLUF logic) to give the listener a frame for filing what follows. It means, next, sparing their working memory: John Sweller's cognitive load theory urges us to cut the extraneous load (presentation) to preserve the load useful for understanding. Finally, chunking — inherited from George Miller's "magical number 7 ± 2" — recommends grouping into three ideas maximum. Order precedes words.