Written Communication
How structured writing teaches you to think strategically.
TL;DR
- Structured writing = structured thinking - Clear writing forces clear thought
- Start with the conclusion - Respects reader's time, forces you to know your point
- No weasel words - Vague language hides unclear thinking
- Use BLUF/Minto Pyramid - Military and consulting frameworks for clarity
Why This Matters
Great writers are great thinkers. The discipline of structuring your writing teaches you to think strategically.
When you're forced to put the conclusion first, you're forced to know what you're trying to say. When you eliminate weasel words, you're forced to think precisely. When you organize your thoughts in a pyramid, you're forced to understand the relationship between your ideas.
The goal: Give you mental models for clear thinking. Once you understand the principles, you'll naturally write (and think) this way.
The Problem
Most business communication fails because:
- The point is buried - Readers have to dig through paragraphs to find what you want
- Thinking is visible - We write as we think, showing our exploration instead of our conclusion
- Language is vague - Weasel words ("improve", "soon", "some") hide unclear thinking
- No clear ask - Messages end without telling the reader what to do
Why this happens: We write chronologically (how we discovered the answer) instead of logically (what the answer is).
Example of the problem:
"Hey, I've been thinking about our Q4 roadmap and noticed a few things. Last quarter we shipped late on 3 features, and I think we might have a similar problem this time. I wanted to discuss if maybe we should consider adjusting our approach. Do you have time to chat?"
What's wrong:
- Point is buried (paragraph 3)
- Thinking is visible ("I've been thinking", "I noticed")
- Language is vague ("maybe we should consider")
- No clear ask ("discuss" - discuss what? When? For how long?)
The Framework: BLUF + Minto Pyramid
Two proven frameworks from military (BLUF) and consulting (Minto Pyramid):
Structure:
- Conclusion first - Your main point, recommendation, or ask
- Key points second - 2-4 supporting arguments
- Details last - Evidence, data, context (optional for reader)
Why it works:
- For the reader: Respects their time. Can stop after line 1 if they get it.
- For the writer: Forces you to know your point before you write. If you can't write line 1, you don't know what you're trying to say.
Same example, restructured:
"We need to cut 2 features from Q4 roadmap to ship on time.
Why:
- Current scope: 8 features, 12 weeks
- Team capacity: 6 features (based on Q3 velocity)
- Risk: Without cuts, we ship Jan instead of Dec 15
Can we discuss which features to cut in tomorrow's 1:1?"
What changed:
- Conclusion in line 1
- Supporting points as bullets
- Clear ask with specific timing
Principle 1: Start with the Conclusion
The insight: If you can't state your point in one sentence, you don't know your point yet.
Why we struggle: We write chronologically (the journey) instead of logically (the destination). We want to show our work. But readers don't care about the journey - they care about where you ended up.
How to fix:
- Write your entire message first
- Then move the last paragraph to the top
- Delete the journey
Before:
"I analyzed Q3 data. Looked at conversion rates. Compared to Q2. Noticed mobile bounce rate increased. Dug into the numbers. Found that..."
After:
"Recommendation: Focus Q2 on mobile conversion. Mobile bounce rate increased 15%, costing us $50K/month. Here's the data: [bullets]."
Why it matters: Starting with the conclusion forces you to do the hard thinking before you write. You can't hide behind vague language when you have to state your point upfront.
Principle 2: Eliminate Weasel Words
The insight: Vague language is a symptom of vague thinking.
What they are: Words that sound meaningful but say nothing specific.
Common weasel words:
- "Should", "Could", "Might", "Perhaps" (hedging)
- "Improve", "Enhance", "Optimize" (without metrics)
- "Some", "Many", "Several" (without numbers)
- "Soon", "Later", "Eventually" (without dates)
Why we use them: They feel safer. Specifics can be wrong. Vagueness can't be challenged.
The cost: Vague language prevents action. "We should improve performance soon" tells the team nothing. "Reduce API response time from 3.2s to <1s by March 15" is actionable.
How to fix:
- Numbers: "3 customers complained" not "some customers"
- Names: "Sarah from sales" not "someone from sales"
- Dates: "by Friday 5pm" not "soon"
- Metrics: "reduce from 3.2s to <1s" not "improve performance"
Before:
"We should improve the checkout flow soon because some users are having issues and conversion could be better."
After:
"Reduce checkout time from 45 seconds to <20 seconds by March 15. This will increase conversion from 12% to 15% based on A/B test with 500 users."
Why it matters: Forcing yourself to use specifics forces you to think precisely. If you can't put a number on it, you don't understand it yet.
Principle 3: State Your Ask
The insight: If the reader doesn't know what you want, they can't help you.
Why we struggle: Asking feels aggressive. We hint instead. "Let me know your thoughts" instead of "Approve this by Friday."
The cost: Messages end without action. Reader doesn't know if they need to decide, approve, discuss, or just acknowledge.
How to fix:
- End with explicit next step
- Include who, what, by when
- Make it actionable
Before:
"Thought you might want to know about the database migration. Let me know your thoughts."
After:
"Approve database migration by EOD Thursday. I need your sign-off to proceed. If you have concerns, let's discuss in Slack by Wednesday."
Why it matters: Clear asks respect the reader's time. They know exactly what you need and can act immediately.
Common Patterns (and Why They Fail)
Pattern 1: No Conclusion
What it looks like: Sharing information without a point.
"I looked at the metrics. Traffic is up 20%. Conversion is down 5%. Mobile bounce rate increased."
Why it fails: Reader has to do the thinking for you. What should they do with this information?
Fix: Add conclusion.
"Recommendation: Focus Q2 on mobile conversion. Traffic is up 20% but mobile bounce rate increased 15%, costing us $50K/month."
Pattern 2: Asking Permission First
What it looks like: "Do you have time?" before stating your ask.
"Hey, got a quick question about our strategy. Do you have 5 minutes?"
Why it fails: Forces two exchanges instead of one. Reader still doesn't know what you need.
Fix: State the ask with context.
"Need your approval on vendor choice. Option A costs $10K less but ships 2 weeks later. Which do you prefer?"
Pattern 3: Burying the Point
What it looks like: Long intro before getting to the point.
"Last week we discussed Q4 planning and I've been thinking about our approach. Historically we've struggled with late deliveries and I noticed a pattern in our retrospectives. After analyzing the data, I think we have a capacity problem. What I'm trying to say is..."
Why it fails: Reader's attention is finite. They may stop reading before you get to the point.
Fix: Start with the point.
"We're over-committed by 40%. Cut 2 features from Q4 or push deadline to Jan 15. Here's the data: [bullets]."
Pattern 4: Insufficient Context
What it looks like: Vague question that requires follow-up.
"Got a quick question about our strategy?"
Why it fails: Forces the reader to ask "What about strategy?" Wastes time.
Fix: Provide full context upfront.
"Should we prioritize feature A (higher revenue, 2 months) or feature B (faster win, lower impact)? Need decision by Friday to start sprint planning."
Pattern 5: Leaving Your Thinking Visible
What it looks like: Unrevised draft showing your thought process.
"So I was looking at the data and first I checked Q3 numbers, then I compared to Q2, and I realized we might have an issue, so I dug deeper and found..."
Why it fails: Reads like a draft, not a finished thought. Makes reader work to extract your point.
Fix: Remove the journey, share the destination.
"Q4 revenue will miss target by $200K based on current conversion rate (12% vs 15% needed). Three options: [bullets]. Recommend option 2."
Pattern 6: Vague Status Updates
What it looks like: Updates that lack context, clear status, or actionable next steps.
"Milestones updated due team member need to switch to other projects. M2: Still on development. M3: Start Oct 29. Stage test: Nov 4."
Why it fails: Reader can't tell:
- Is this on track or delayed?
- What help is needed?
- What changed and why?
- What action should they take?
Fix: Give context, state impact, clear ask.
"Payments Malaysia delayed 2 weeks (Jan 15 → Jan 29). Sarah switched to Supply project (CEO priority). Impact: Q1 revenue target drops $50K. Need decision: hire contractor ($15K) to stay on Jan 15, or accept Jan 29 date?"
What changed:
- Clear timeline change (2 weeks delayed)
- Specific reason (Sarah to Supply, CEO priority)
- Business impact ($50K revenue)
- Clear decision needed with options and costs
Putting It Together
Before sending any message, ask:
- Can I state my point in one sentence? If not, you're not ready to write yet.
- Is my conclusion in line 1? If not, move it there.
- Are there weasel words? Replace with numbers, names, dates.
- Is my thinking visible? Delete the journey, keep the conclusion.
- What's my ask? Make it explicit.
Good structure:
[Conclusion/Ask in first sentence]
[2-4 key supporting points as bullets]
[Optional: Supporting data/context]
[Clear next step with deadline]Example: Well-Structured Message
Subject: Q4 Roadmap - Need decision by Friday
We need to cut 2 features from Q4 to ship on time.
Why:
- Current scope: 8 features, 12 weeks
- Team capacity: 6 features, 12 weeks (based on Q3 velocity)
- Risk: Without cuts, we'll ship in Jan instead of Dec 15
Options:
- Cut features C and D (lowest impact, saves 4 weeks)
- Push deadline to Jan 15 (affects year-end goals)
- Add 2 contractors (cost: $80K, available in 2 weeks)
Recommendation: Option 1. Features C and D can move to Q1.
Next step: Approve by Friday 5pm so we can update sprint planning.
Why This Matters Beyond Writing
Structured writing teaches structured thinking. When you practice this framework:
- You learn to separate facts from opinions
- You learn to identify what actually matters
- You learn to think from the reader's perspective
- You learn to make decisions before asking for input
These are strategic thinking skills. Writing is just the practice ground.
References: