There is a particular kind of meeting that most people have sat through at least once. Someone is presenting. They set the context. They explain the background. They walk through what they looked at and why. And somewhere around minute twelve, you realise you still have no idea what they are actually recommending.
The frustrating thing is that the person presenting is often very smart. They have done the work. They’re just communicating in the manner we’ve all been trained to ever since Alexander Bain published English Composition and Rhetoric in 1866.
The structure feels logical because it mirrors how they actually arrived at the answer. But their audience didn’t take the same journey. By the time they actually get to the point, most listeners have mentally checked out.
The pyramid, briefly
In the 1970s, Barbara Minto was working at McKinsey and editing more internal reports than any one person should ever have to read. She noticed that the clearest, most persuasive writing had something in common: it led with the conclusion and supported it, rather than building up to it. She turned that observation into a framework that has since become something of a management communication staple.
The structure is simple. You start with your recommendation (or main point). Then you give the two or three reasons it is the right call. Then, for anyone who wants or needs it, you provide the evidence behind each reason.
The last layer is optional reading. The first two are not.
The thing that makes this structure genuinely useful is that it works for every level of attention in your audience. The person who just wants a general sense of things gets the conclusion first. The person who needs mild convincing then gets the arguments. The person who will need to act on your recommendation can drill all the way down to the details. Nobody has to wade through excess context to get what they need
Some examples
Here’s a set of examples written in two ways: first the way most of us were trained to present our ideas, and then the way Minto would have us do it.
Example 1: Technical decision
Before: “We started this sprint looking at three different approaches to the caching layer. The first one we tried ran into issues with invalidation timing. The second one worked but added latency we weren’t comfortable with. After more testing, we landed on a hybrid approach that seems to be holding up in staging.”
After: “Recommendation: ship the hybrid caching approach next sprint. It’s the only option that solves invalidation without adding latency, and it’s already holding up in staging. (Background: we also tried two other approaches, happy to walk through why they didn’t work, if useful).”
Example 2: Hiring decision
Before: “We interviewed five candidates for the role. Two were strong on technical skills but weaker on communication. One had great communication but limited experience with our stack. The fourth withdrew. The fifth candidate, who we saw last, actually impressed the panel the most.”
After: “Recommendation: hire candidate five. Reasons: strongest technical fit of the group, the panel was unanimous, and she’s available to start in two weeks. (Detail on the other four candidates below if you want it).”
Example 3: Vendor selection
Before: “Our current vendor has been fine but we’ve noticed support response times have crept up over the last two quarters. We looked at switching providers and got quotes from three alternatives. Two were more expensive. One was comparable in price but had better SLAs.”
After: “Recommendation: switch to Vendor B next quarter. It matches our current spend, offers a tighter SLA, and solves the support delays we’ve flagged twice in retros. (Comparison details below for anyone who wants the numbers).”
Try it this week
Pick one update or recommendation you need to send in the next few days.
Before you write anything else, write this sentence:
“My recommendation is...” or
“The bottom line is...”
Then ask yourself: what are the two or three reasons you believe your conclusion to be true? Write those next, at a gentle level of detail. Everything else goes below.
If you remove those bottom layers entirely, can the top still stand? If yes, you have a solid message. If not, your key arguments probably need to be sharpened.
It will feel abrupt the first time you try it but we’ve consistently seen solid improvements when our clients start communicating this way.
We coach our clients on communication and influence across all levels of an organisation. You can access much of what we know by becoming a coaching client or for more scale, check out our Presence & Influence workshop for your team.