214 lines
8.3 KiB
Markdown
214 lines
8.3 KiB
Markdown
|
# STRUCTURE – Organize content
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
STRUCTURE covers all aspects of organizing the content of reports and presentations.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
_Organizing the content_ means that reports and presentations follow a logical
|
|||
|
structure forming a convincing storyline.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This chapter covers using consistent elements, building non-overlapping elements,
|
|||
|
building collectively exhaustive elements, building hierarchical structures, and
|
|||
|
visualizing their structure properly.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. [Use consistent elements](#st-1-use-consistent-elements)
|
|||
|
2. [Build non-overlapping elements](#st-2-build-non-overlapping-elements)
|
|||
|
3. [Build collectively exhaustive elements](#st-3-build-collectively-exhaustive-elements)
|
|||
|
4. [Build hierarchical structures](#st-4-build-hierarchical-structures)
|
|||
|
5. [Visualize structure](#st-5-visualize-structure)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 1 Use consistent elements
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Listings and groupings of any kind of elements (items, terms, pictures, symbols,
|
|||
|
etc.) used to organize content in charts, tables, and texts should contain
|
|||
|
consistent elements only. This pertains for example to items, statements,
|
|||
|
wordings, and the appearance of symbols and pictures.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 1.1 Use consistent items
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 1.1: Use consistent items](img/st-1.1.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Items in a group should be of the same type, i.e. consistent. Consistent
|
|||
|
items can be different types of cars, houses, traffic signs, or – as
|
|||
|
shown in Figure ST 1.1, on the right hand side – different national
|
|||
|
flags representing the corresponding nations. The left hand side of this
|
|||
|
figure includes other types of items besides national flags, destroying
|
|||
|
the consistency.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 1.2 Use consistent types of statements
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 1.2: Use consistent types of statements](img/st-1.2.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
A list of statements will be easier to understand if all statements are
|
|||
|
of the same type. The right hand side of Figure ST 1.2 shows four
|
|||
|
suggestions. By contrast, on the left-hand side of this figure the third
|
|||
|
statement is a detection, not a suggestion.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 1.3 Use consistent wording
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 1.3: Use consistent wording](img/st-1.3.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Structure all phrases – especially in listed arrangements – in a
|
|||
|
grammatically consistent manner to facilitate quicker understanding. The
|
|||
|
right hand side of Figure ST 1.3 shows a group of four consistent
|
|||
|
suggestions, an imperative verb paired with a noun. By contrast, on the
|
|||
|
left hand side of this figure the second suggestion uses verbal
|
|||
|
substantive instead of an imperative.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 1.4 Use consistent visualizations
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 1.4: Use consistent visualizations](img/st-1.4.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Visualizations such as symbols and pictures that are uniform in respect
|
|||
|
to their layouts, colors, forms, fonts, etc. – especially in listed
|
|||
|
arrangements – facilitate faster and easier comprehension.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 2 Build non-overlapping elements
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Elements belonging to a group should not overlap, i.e. they should be disjoint or
|
|||
|
mutually exclusive. This concerns practical applications such as report
|
|||
|
structures, business measures, or structure dimensions.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 2.1 Build non-overlapping report structures
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 2.1: Build non-overlapping report structures](img/st-2.1.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Structure reports and presentations in such a way that the parts,
|
|||
|
chapters, sections, and paragraphs do not overlap. They should not cover
|
|||
|
the same aspects.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In Figure ST 2.1, on the left hand side, the following chapters of a
|
|||
|
project description overlap:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
- expenses and costs
|
|||
|
- schedule, steps, milestones, and calendar
|
|||
|
- objective, results, and achievements
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
At first glance, the six terms on the right hand side of this figure have
|
|||
|
no overlap in their logical structure. Of course, a relationship exists
|
|||
|
between the _cost_, the _results_, and the
|
|||
|
_schedule_ of a project, but in regards to the content of the
|
|||
|
chapters this is not an overlap.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 2.2 Build non-overlapping business measures
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 2.2: Build non-overlapping business measures](img/st-2.2.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Structure a group of business measures in lists or calculations in a way
|
|||
|
they do not overlap, i.e. business measures on one hierarchical level
|
|||
|
should be disjoint or mutually exclusive.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Looking at Figure ST 2.2, on the left hand side, the following business
|
|||
|
measures overlap
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
- _material costs_ and _costs of goods sold_
|
|||
|
- _depreciation_ and _fixed costs_
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The calculation scheme on the right hand side has been cleaned up.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 2.3 Build non-overlapping structure dimensions
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 2.3: Build non-overlapping structure dimensions](img/st-2.3.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The elements of the _structure dimensions_ used in reports and presentations should not overlap, i.e.
|
|||
|
the elements of a structure dimension should be disjoint or mutually
|
|||
|
exclusive.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Looking at Figure ST 2.3 on the left hand side, the regions _Norway,
|
|||
|
Sweden, Denmark,_ and _Finland_ overlap with _Scandinavia_.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 3 Build collectively exhaustive elements
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
A list of elements is considered to be exhaustive when they cover all aspects of
|
|||
|
a superordinate topic. For example, dividing _Europe_ into
|
|||
|
_Germany_, _Austria_, _Switzerland_, and _Belgium_
|
|||
|
is not exhaustive because other countries also belong to Europe.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Structures with mutually exclusive (ME) and collectively exhaustive (CE) elements
|
|||
|
are known as MECE structures.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 3.1 Build exhaustive arguments
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 3.1: Build exhaustive arguments](img/st-3.1.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If some important arguments relating to a specific question are left out,
|
|||
|
the given answer will not be convincing.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Looking at Figure ST 3.1 on the left hand side the option “_old
|
|||
|
products, new location_” is missing.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 3.2 Build exhaustive structures in charts and tables
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 3.2: Build exhaustive structures in charts and tables](img/st-3.2.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The elements of structures presented in charts and tables should also be
|
|||
|
exhaustive, in other words, adding up to one hundred percent.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In many practical applications of this kind, adding a remainder element
|
|||
|
(“rest of…”) helps to conform to this rule.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 4 Build hierarchical structures
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Give reports and presentations a hierarchical structure whenever possible,
|
|||
|
resulting in faster comprehension and simplified searching. These rules help to
|
|||
|
write and present a good storyline.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 4.1 Use deductive reasoning
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 4.1: Use deductive reasoning](img/st-4.1.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Exhibiting deductive reasoning (_logical flow_) for a given
|
|||
|
message aids in _building_ hierarchical structures. _Logical
|
|||
|
flows_ always answer the question “why” following the key
|
|||
|
message. They begin with a statement (all men are mortal), continue with
|
|||
|
a comment (Socrates is a man), and resolve with a conclusion (Socrates
|
|||
|
is mortal) culminating in the message (Socrates will die).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Deductive reasoning can be best applied in controversial discussions for
|
|||
|
arguing and demonstrating need for action. However, it forces the
|
|||
|
readers or the audience to reproduce the deduction and the whole
|
|||
|
argumentation can collapse if any statements are questionable.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 4.2 Use inductive reasoning
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 4.2: Use inductive reasoning](img/st-4.2.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Exhibiting _inductive_ reasoning (_logical group_) for a
|
|||
|
given message aids in understanding hierarchical structures. _Logical
|
|||
|
groups_ are homogenous, non-overlapping, and collectively
|
|||
|
exhaustive arguments culminating in a message. This results in a
|
|||
|
powerful argumentation that satisfies the addressees need for an easily
|
|||
|
comprehensible logical structure.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 5 Visualize structure
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Having organized the arguments hierarchically, visualize this structure in order
|
|||
|
to make the storyline transparent.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 5.1 Visualize structure in reports
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 5.1: Visualize structure in reports](img/st-5.1.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
For easier understanding, underscore the logical structure of reports and
|
|||
|
presentations with visual aids (e.g. outlines, dashboards, summaries).
|
|||
|
Figure ST 5.1 illustrates this rule showing binder tabs on the right
|
|||
|
hand side.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 5.2 Visualize structure in tables
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 5.2: Visualize structure in tables](img/st-5.2.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Design tables in such a manner that their hierarchical structure can be
|
|||
|
recognized in both the columns as well as the rows.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The right hand side of Figure ST 5.2 shows three hierarchical levels of
|
|||
|
rows in a table. The base level shows cities, the first summary shows
|
|||
|
regions, and the second summary shows the country.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
## ST 5.3 Visualize structure in notes
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
![Figure ST 5.3: Visualize structure in notes](img/st-5.3.png)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Notes are also easier to understand when their structure is shown clearly
|
|||
|
(see Figure ST 5.3).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
[← Convey a message](01-say.md) | [Choose proper visualization →](04-express.md)
|