The Minto Pyramid Principle helped me rethink how to build an argument. It suggests starting with the conclusion, then layering the support beneath it — a pyramid, with the idea at the tip and the evidence holding it up.

It’s not just a clever metaphor. It mirrors how we naturally process information. We want the “why” before the “how.” Lead with your recommendation; let the logic follow. Good structure isn’t a flourish — it’s a courtesy.

Lately, I think of this idea more simply: fencepost communication. A fence doesn’t stand because the wire is tight or the boards are polished. It stands because the posts are strong. Arguments work the same way. Lay out the posts first. Then connect them. The structure becomes the message.

For example, instead of saying:

“Our research shows X, our analysis says Y, and trends suggest Z. Therefore, we should expand internationally,”

flip it:

“We should expand internationally. Three things support this: market readiness, internal capability, and rising demand.”

The difference isn’t just cosmetic. When you lead with the conclusion, you force clarity — on yourself first, then on your audience. It’s a quiet discipline that sharpens both the thinking and the delivery.

In a world with too many words and too little attention, clarity isn’t just polite. It’s an advantage.

Start with intent and name your fenceposts. Let the structure do some of the talking.