The Myth That Executive Readers Want 'Context' Before the Answer
We are terrified of being misunderstood, so we bury the lead under five pages of background. This isn't polite; it's boring. Start with the answer.
The “Once Upon a Time” Strategy
I reviewed a Monthly Business Review deck yesterday that began with a slide titled: Agenda & Contextual Landscape.
It listed the dates of the campaign. It listed the channels we used. It listed the weather patterns in August. It was incredibly polite, very detailed, and utterly boring.
The client, a CEO with a calendar that looked like a game of Tetris played by a sadist, was tapping his pen.
He didn’t care about the weather in August. He wanted to know if his investment was safe.
We write reports linearly because that is how we think. We did the research (Step 1), then the analysis (Step 2), then found the insight (Step 3). So we present it in that order: 1, 2, 3.
But the client reads in reverse. They want the Insight (3) immediately. If they agree with it, they ignore the rest. If they doubt it, they look at the Analysis (2). Only if they are really suspicious do they look at the Research (1).
The Drag: The Safety Blanket of Words
Why do we do this? Why do we force people to wade through the swamp of “Context” before they get to the castle?
It is fear.
We are terrified that if we just say, “Sales are down because the pricing is wrong,” the client will yell at us. So we pad it. We build a fortress of words to protect ourselves. We explain the market conditions, the competitor activity, and the technical glitches, hoping that by the time we get to the bad news, the client will be too tired to be angry.
This is dodgy. It signals insecurity. It says, “I am not sure about this, so I am going to show you all my working out.”
To an executive, time is the most expensive resource. Wasting it on “Background” is a sign of disrespect.
The Answer: The Pyramid Principle (Again)
I will preach this until I lose my voice: Answer First.
Every report, every email, every slide should start with the conclusion.
The Old Way (The Drag):
- Slide 1: Background of the project.
- Slide 2: Methodology of the audit.
- Slide 3: Data observations.
- Slide 4: Conclusion: We need to fix the checkout page.
The Oliver Way (The Answer):
- Slide 1: We need to fix the checkout page. (This will save £50k/month).
- Slide 2: Here is the data that proves it.
- Slide 3: (Appendix) Here is the background if you are bored.
[Image of an inverted pyramid diagram]
[TO EDITOR: Diagram of an Inverted Pyramid. Top layer is wide and labelled “THE ANSWER (What & Why)”. Middle layer is “THE ARGUMENTS”. Bottom tip is “THE DATA/CONTEXT”. Label the diagram “The Executive’s Preference”.]
When you lead with the answer, the dynamic changes. You are no longer a student handing in an essay. You are a consultant giving advice.
“We need to fix the checkout page.” The CEO looks at you. “Why?” “Because it’s leaking 20% of traffic. Here is the chart.” “Spot on. Do it.”
Meeting over. Renewal secured. Context is useful, but it belongs in the appendix, not the foyer.
FAQs
But if I give the answer first, won't they stop reading?
Hopefully. If they trust you, they take the answer and move on. That is the goal. We are not writing thriller novels; we are selling decisions.
What if the answer is bad news?
Then you definitely put it first. Bad news ages like milk, not wine. Get it out in the open so you can discuss the fix.
Does this apply to emails too?
Especially emails. If I have to scroll to find out what you want, I am deleting you.