Point first, context second

Write your point first, context second.

• Asking a question? Question first, context second.
• Giving a status update? Status first, details second.
• Requesting something? Request first, reasoning second.

I’ve found that this formula is extremely useful for efficient communication.

Why?

You waste everyone’s time when you put the context first. Your reader must read your entire message to learn why you sent it. Or worse, they’ll skim your message and miss your point altogether.

Best case, they spend longer reading your message. Medium case, you lengthen the conversation by several messages. Worst case, you form a silent misunderstanding that’ll bite you days or weeks later.

What happens when you put the point last?

Imagine you receive this question from a coworker:

Hey Doc, I wrote up a short doc that compares the pros and cons of using a flux capacitor instead of a plutonium-fueled nuclear reactor for our time machine. Instead of diving into the details, I decided to stick with the major points to get a good starting point for discussion.

Interestingly, the flux capacitor can produce the needed 1.21 Jigowatts of power in 21% less time.

[… here’s where your coworker asks the question …]

Notice that until you reach the actual question:

• How do you know what’s relevant?
• How do you know what’s important?
• How do you know if you need to take action?
• How do you know if you need to respond?
• How do you know if this is urgent?
• How do you know if you need to read this carefully?

The answer: you don’t. You have to read the entire message to get to the question. And different questions greatly change the point of the message. For instance, the questions “Should we use a flux capacitor?”, “Do you have any considerations I didn’t think of?”, and “Please review my doc” are very different requests.

This wastes time because you have to read the message twice: once to find the question and once to understand the message.

This is what happens when you put your point last.

Instead, here’s the same message with the point first:

Hey Doc, do you think we should use a flux capacitor instead of a plutonium-fueled nuclear reactor for our time machine?

I think so because the flux capacitor can produce the needed 1.21 Jigowatts of power in 21% less time.

In case you think we need more discussion, I wrote up a short doc that compares the pros and cons of each option.

Notice how that’s just easier to read? Put your point first, context second.

Examples

Conclusion

Efficient communication isn’t a Sherlock Holmes murder mystery. Don’t leave clues on who the murderer is only to reveal it at the last second. Don’t bury the lead. Tell me who’s the murderer in your first sentence.

Write your point first, context second.