How to create business documents and structure your own ideas. Principle of the Minto Pyramid

While working as a McKinsey consultant, Barbara Minto created her own method of writing analytical papers based on how a person perceives information.
A business text is well perceived when ideas are logically interconnected and built according to the principle of a hierarchical pyramid. Ideas of a lower level of the hierarchy serve to reveal the content of ideas more high level hierarchy.

Ideas within the pyramid are subject to three golden rules:

the ideas of each level should generalize the ideas grouped by the level below;
ideas in each group should always be of the same kind / related
the ideas in each group must go in a logical sequence, which can be one of the following types:
- deductive (large premise, small premise, conclusion),
- chronological (first, second, third),
- structural (Boston, New York, Washington),
- classification and comparative (the first most important subject, the second most important subject, etc.).
To form a pyramidal structure of the text, you can use the question "Why?".
For example, "Purchase of a large English company Leyland under a franchise agreement" breaks down into three components that answer the question "Why?":
"The growth rate of the company will exceed the growth rate of the industry"
"The company will have positive financial results"
"It won't be hard to get the job done."
These three components break down into three or two more subparagraphs.

The construction of the pyramid must begin with "Knowledge"
The introduction is written in narrative form; it should formulate the main question, which is further answered in the document. The introduction describes the situation and the development of this situation. Both of these elements must be familiar to the reader. The development of the situation initiates the question, which is answered in the document. The question should not arise ahead of time, but only as a result of the development of the situation.

The structure of the introduction consists of the following sections:

Situation. This is a judgment about the subject, which is self-sufficient and indisputable.
Difficulty / Problem
The question that arises in the reader after realizing the problem
Answer to the question = key idea of the document

There are two main approaches to building a pyramid: top-down and bottom-up.

"Top down":

1. Fill in the top block of the pyramid by answering the questions:

What exactly are you discussing?
What question about the topic (object) facing the reader are you answering?
What is your answer?

2. Formulate and clarify the question for entry

What is the situation?
What are the difficulties?
Is the question and answer formulated?

3. Define a line of key statements

What new question is generated by the above answer?
Shall we answer it inductively or deductively?
If inductively, what is the unifying plural noun?

4. Structure supportive considerations

“bottom-up” (most effective method) :

Write down all the ideas that you would like to express.
Consider how they are related to each other.
Draw conclusions from ideas and connections.

Construction "from the bottom up" can be started when all the arguments and ideas are known and it is necessary to build on the basis of them the logic of presentation - the pyramid of Minto.

When you choose words for headings and tables of contents, try to reflect essential ideas, not general categories or stages of thought.
Try to start building the pyramid from above
Use the description of the situation as the beginning of the process of thinking about the introduction
Don't forget to justify your intro
Always include information about the occurrence of the situation in the introduction
The information in the introduction should only be what the reader believes to be true.
Be sure to justify each position of the key line. Statements must be substantiated until no more questions arise.
Build bridges between the structural units of the text. To do this, you can refer to what was said earlier, BUT: do not repeat what you DID.

Structure your document:

Reflect document structure in text, using:

headers. Headings should reflect the sequence of reasoning and include the main ideas. Do not use simple numbers or anonymous headers (like Section 1)
Bold and underline for key ideas
Hierarchical numbering (in addition to section titles).

The author of the proposed hypothesis is a mechanical engineer. He has been living in Israel for almost four years now. Prior to that, he lived all his life in Moscow, during the Great Patriotic War was a long-range aviation navigator, after graduating from the institute he worked as a designer at enterprises, foundry engineering. Jochiel Don-Jahio became interested in the Egyptian pyramids from an engineering point of view and decided to answer the old question in his own way: was it possible to build the Pyramid within the period indicated in historical documents and, if possible, how?

Many books and studies have been written about the great Egyptian pyramids at Giza. However, questions related to the methods of their construction still remain open, and the arguments in favor of certain answers do not seem quite convincing. Maybe that's why I would like to express my assumptions. As the main source of information, I used the well-known book by J.F. Lauer "The Mysteries of the Egyptian Pyramids", which contains the most complete digital data related to the construction of these monuments of the Ancient World.

I will give a few parameters that do not need to be verified and will be the starting point in further reasoning. For this purpose, true dimensional accuracy is not at all necessary, therefore, we assume that the length of the side of the base of the Cheops pyramid is 230 m, the number of steps of the pyramid is 200. The number of stone blocks with an average weight of each 2.5 tons and a volume of 1 cubic meter. m, laid in the body of the structure - 2.6 million. In addition, 115,500 marble slabs were required to cover the pyramid.

Let us also pay attention to important point. In addition to laying stone blocks on the horizontal platforms of each level, which is a relatively simple matter, the blocks had to be raised higher and higher, and this task is the main one in calculating the pace of construction. JF Lauer writes that there are two answers to this question. He refers to the writings of Herodotus, who suggested that the stacking of multi-ton blocks from one level to another was carried out using wooden machines. The second method is described by Diodorus Siculus, who suggested that the Egyptians, in order to lift blocks on different levels earth embankments were used. Disputes continue to this day, but what is important: as a result, their German engineer L. Kroon calculated that workers could lay 150 stone blocks per day. This parameter can be taken to calculate the construction time of the Cheops pyramid. Although during the construction of this pyramid, the weight of the block was almost twice as much as that which the German engineer's brother for calculations.

Herodotus, according to the priests, wrote that the pyramid of Cheops was built for 20 years. Could the ancient Egyptians have built a gigantic pyramid in that amount of time? Let's try to mentally follow the initial stage of construction, not taking into account the methods of moving stone blocks up as the structure grows. The construction site was chosen by the architect on the rocky plateau of the Libyan Desert. On this site, the base square was marked with the orientation of the sides according to the cardinal points. There are still no convincing versions of how the ancient Egyptians, who did not know the compass, were able to make such an accurate orientation of one of the sides of the square to the north with an error of only a few minutes. The researchers, describing the pyramids, note that all the blocks are so carefully processed and tightly fitted to each other that it is impossible to stick a knife blade between them. In addition, it was also necessary to observe the horizontality of each row of masonry. Such strict construction conditions, of course, significantly slowed down the speed of work.

Modern Egyptologists are not very clear about the number of working days per year that were used to build the pyramid. Some believe that three months were allotted for work, when the population of Egypt was free from field work. Apparently, it was during the flood of the Nile. However, Herodotus wrote down the stories of the priests that the Egyptians dragged stones from the quarries located on the Arabian Range, that is, from the right bank of the Nile, from where other Egyptians transported blocks across the river on ships, and so they worked continuously - for every three months it was occupied by one hundred thousand people. We will adhere to the version of Herodotus, otherwise, the time for the construction of the pyramid increases several times.

And now let's try, at least in general terms, to build a cyclogram of the technological chain in order to outline those operations that, in fact, determine productivity. At the beginning of the technological chain there are quarries, where stone blocks are mined, then the stones are lowered down from the quarries, where they are processed. Next comes the transportation of blocks from the quarries to the construction site and, finally, their laying in the structure.

How were blocks cut out of limestone hills? This operation is described in popular literature as follows: along the boundaries of the stone block marked on the limestone rock, the workers hollowed out deep furrows in the stone, into which they hammered dry wood wedges and poured water on them. The wet wood began to swell, the crack widened, and the block broke off. The chipped stone was pulled out of the mines with the help of ropes. This operation is not subdivided into elements, and each block is mined by one team of workers from start to finish.
This or that way the stone was mined does not matter to us. It is important to understand that it takes a lot of time to extract multi-ton blocks of strictly defined sizes, and if we agree that during the working day one team of masons will be able to extract one stone, then this is not so little. Now remember L. Kroon's figure - 150. 150 blocks per day - that means there had to be 150 quarries supplying one block per day for the construction to go smoothly. Let's try to estimate, again only roughly, what careers look like and what space they can occupy. To extract 2.6 million blocks from 150 quarries, each of them must have a supply of suitable material for at least 20 thousand blocks. Apparently, this is a series of calcareous rocks, in which stone is mined in ledges. In fact, the volume of such quarries, taking into account the waste, should be greater than the volume of the pyramid under construction, and they can be located in a space of several kilometers.

The next major operation is the processing of blocks in exact dimensions from all six sides. If the blocks are to be adjacent to each other without the slightest gaps, the processing must be done very carefully, while maintaining the parallelism of the horizontal planes. Moreover, during the processing of the stone, it has to be repeatedly turned over. It would probably have been expedient to entrust this operation to one team of masons. Despite the high labor intensity of the operation, we will accept the processing time of one block as equal to one working day. Thus, during the day, 150 blocks suitable for laying were made.

The next operation is transporting them to the construction site. For this purpose, ready-made blocks on drags or otherwise had to be delivered from all 150 sections to the main road and further to the construction site.

We do not know the speed of movement, nor the distance over which the blocks had to be dragged. Perhaps the speed of the teams was very low, and the distances were very long, and in order to deliver all 150 stones to the place, it was necessary to spend not one, but two or three days. But let's discard possible additional delays and agree that all 150 blocks were delivered to Right place within one business day.

Now, having approximate estimates of the performance of each operation, we can easily calculate the time required to build the body of the pyramid: 365 working days a year, 150 blocks are laid in laziness, the volume of the pyramid is 2.6 million cubic meters. As a result, we get 47.5 years.

But that is not all. It is required to veneer the body of the pyramid with marble slabs. A very responsible operation, since the lining is carried out from top to bottom and the plates must be raised to a great height. The fit of the plates must be very precise, without the slightest gaps, with the use of mortar and final grinding at the workplace. In addition, it is necessary to constantly control the angles of inclination of the pyramid faces. This operation cannot be used a large number of brigades, so as not to start facing in many places, followed by laborious docking. It can be assumed that 40 teams could work simultaneously on all faces at an average height of 70 m - 10 on each face. If in one day a team lays two slabs, and 40 teams, respectively, 80, then it will take 3.9 years to cover the entire pyramid (I remind you: the number of slabs is 115,500).

Then the construction time of the lined pyramid will be 47.5 + 3.9 = 51.4 years, and taking into account the utilization rate of the technological chain (0.75), the total construction time is 51.4: 0.75 = 68.5 years. We will not take into account the time spent on creating the interior of the pyramid in the building, galleries and passages.

So, if the pyramid of Cheops was erected according to the generally accepted method, then it would have to be built for 70 years. Where is the error in this reasoning? How can you keep within 20 years, the same 20 years that Herodotus wrote about?
Perhaps we have not taken into account the full use of a hundred thousand army of workers?

Let us calculate how many workers are simultaneously employed in construction in the above technological chain.
1. On cutting blocks in 150 quarries, 10 workers per team - 1500 workers. 2. On the processing of blocks at 150 sites, 10 workers per team - 1500 workers. 3. Auxiliary workers for operations 1 and 2 - 4500 workers. 4. Transportation of blocks from 150 sites for 80 workers in a brigade - 12,000 workers. 5. Laying blocks of 10 workers in 150 teams - 1500 workers. 6. Auxiliary workers for operation 5 - 4500 workers. Total: 25,500 workers.

It turns out that 25,500 people should be involved in all works daily. But these are far from the 100 thousand that Herodotus wrote about. To make sure our calculations are correct, we will once again check the reliability of the main performance parameter, namely, 150 blocks per day. Is it possible, by using a huge mass of workers, to increase the productivity of labor?

Let's look at the first level of masonry at the very base of the pyramid with sides of a square of 230 meters. How will 150 brigades of block stackers fit along a perimeter of 920 meters? It turns out that the brigades are forced to crowd at a distance of 6 meters from each other. If, for verification, we take a level of 70 meters along the height of the pyramid with a square perimeter of 460 meters, then 150 teams will not be able to work at all, since the distance between them will be only 3 meters.

So the question of one hundred thousand workers a day remains open. We will return to it a little later. In the meantime, let's sum up some intermediate results: about 70 years are needed in order to cut down one or more limestone mountains in one place, cut them into cubes, from which to build another mountain in a new place, which, you see, is absolute nonsense. If we were more realistic about the number of blocks laid during a working day, and reduced their number to, say, 100 or less, then the construction period would increase to 100 years, or even more.

But it cannot be that such an illustrious architect as Hemuin started a construction that he would hardly have been able to complete during his lifetime. Let's return from the distant past to our time and look through the eyes of an ordinary person at the First Wonder of the World. What do we see? A gigantic structure that stood for more than 46 centuries. The cladding was torn off a long time ago, but strictly horizontal steps are clearly visible, there are more than 200 of them. It is striking that no serious damage and cracks are visible in this hulk. But for thousands of years there have been many earthquakes in this region, and some of them were of terrible force.

Such seismic resistance is possible only if the pyramid is a solid monolith. This somehow does not fit with the construction of it from millions of cubes. But if we come closer to the pyramid, we will see with amazement that the horizontal rows of masonry are formed not by carefully processed blocks, but ... blocks of stones of different sizes in width and height. If the whole pyramid, including its invisible core, was built of such unhewn stones, then it should have collapsed a long time ago, and our contemporaries would have nothing to study so closely. And if these visible outer stones are not a continuation of the main masonry, then what are they for, what is their purpose?

So the conclusion suggests itself that the pyramid of Cheops was erected in some other way, simpler and relatively faster, knowing which, many of the mysteries of the structure could be explained.
It doesn't take a big flight of fancy to imagine in place of the existing pyramids in the distant past an ordinary limestone hill about 150 meters high, gently descending into the valley. It is quite natural to assume that the architect, who chose a good place for construction, had a decision not to cut down other limestone hills and drag building material to this place, but to cut down the planned structure in an already existing hill.

For this, the conditions were ideal. Firstly, the body of the pyramid became a monolith, going far into the depths of the earth. Secondly, there is a large free area around the construction site, which could accommodate hundreds of thousands of workers. Their task was to chip off and drag down the cut down excess material, level the surface of the hill during construction, crush blocks and scatter stones in the lowland. The same workers, without much difficulty, dragged up the sloping surface the necessary Construction Materials. Thirdly, it became possible to accurately orient the pyramid to the cardinal points, which will be discussed later. Fourthly, there was no need for any complex mechanisms to move stone blocks to a height. Fifth, it was possible to get inside the array at any level of the pyramid, breaking through passages and constructing rooms.

Let's try now, without going into details, to mentally follow the construction technology according to our version.
First of all, probably, the top of the hill was cut off and the horizontal platform was leveled. Then a small pyramid was erected on the site, several meters high, with a square base and with the desired angle of inclination of all faces. This pyramid could have been made of lightweight material, even wood, because it had to be rotated to accurately orient itself to the north. Inside the pyramid there could be a device, possibly in the form of a pipe and a cord with a plumb line, for astronomical observations of the North Star or another object that corresponded to the position to the "north". After precise orientation, the pyramid was fixed on the site and the ledges of the pyramid began to be cut down. The angles of inclination of the faces were controlled at the initial stage of work on the small pyramid.

When the hull rose a little and the need for precise orientation along the control pyramid disappeared, it was dismantled and a top made of stone blocks was erected in its place. Perhaps this top was attached in some way to the body of the structure. Special literature mentions that on the upper platform of the pyramid of Cheops, allegedly, holes for attaching some kind of crowning structure are still visible.

It is appropriate to pay attention to the composition rock from which the pyramid was cut. These are limestones occurring in layers of great thickness - several hundred and even thousands of meters. They come in different densities, are well processed and sawn. Apparently, this is why the architect decided that it would be relatively easy to cut out the ledges, but then it is necessary to strengthen the body of the pyramid along the outer contour with stone blocks of a denser and harder material. It was mined from quarries on the other side of the Nile. These dense stones were transported to the cut ledges and there they were laid in several rows in depth and height. The disordered stone blocks that we see now are those steps or rows, of which there are more than two hundred in the pyramid of Cheops. Of course, these stones have found today's view due to a long process of weathering in the conditions of the Libyan desert after facing plates were torn off in ancient times.

Let's try to approximately determine the duration of the construction of the Cheops pyramid according to the estimated technological process. The question immediately arises: is the described technology as senseless as in the generally accepted version? Indeed, in order to cut down the body of the pyramid, it is necessary to tear down to the base all the excess material of the lime hill, the volume of which is 30 times greater than the volume of the pyramid itself. Yes, indeed, the volume of transported material increases dramatically, but the complexity of the process is significantly reduced. You will have to cut down stone blocks of certain sizes at least 10 times less. The operation of hewing them from all sides is almost completely eliminated, and, most importantly, work can be carried out continuously on the entire area of the hill, using the labor of tens and hundreds of thousands of workers. In the process of work, not only a pyramid is cut out of a hill, but also a transport artery like those embankments that were erected, according to one of the hypotheses, to lift stone blocks according to the “old” technology - with the only difference that this natural embankment is not erected, but destroyed as the building grows.

Imagine the technological chain of the construction process. We will not consider initial stage, that is, the installation of a control pyramid, and we will proceed immediately to the operation of cutting ledges.

Let us calculate the amount of work for the manufacture of a ledge located at the middle of the height of the pyramid. The width of the ledge shelf depends on its height from the aspect ratio of the triangle 14:11, which corresponds to the angle of inclination of the pyramid faces to the base, equal to 51 0 50".

The volume of the ledge is equal to the product of the perimeter of the square at an average height of 460 meters and the sectional area of the ledge. However, when cutting ledges for freedom of maneuver with further laying of reinforcing stones, we will increase the width of the shelf to 5 m, keeping in mind that the same teams that were mentioned above cut the hill at this level. So, the volume of the ledge is 1.5 x 5 x 460 = 3450 cubic meters. m. In total, there will be an average of 100 ledges, then the total amount of work will be: 3450 x 100 \u003d 345,000 cubic meters. m. Considering that in this operation it is necessary to strictly maintain two parameters: the vertical of the ledge wall and the horizontal of the ledge, it is possible to accept the productivity during this operation, as in the case of ordinary cutting of stones according to the accepted technology, equal to 150 cubic meters. m. a day. Then it will take 345,000 to cut down all the ledges: 150 x 365 = 6.3 years.
Let's calculate the volume of masonry that reinforces the walls. On one ledge, the volume is 1.5 x 3.6 x 460 \u003d 2480 cubic meters. m., and for 100 ledges - 248,000 cubic meters. m. Time for laying strengthening stones with a volume of 1 cu. m. is equal to 248,000: 150 x 365 = 4.5 years.
The next operation - cladding with marble slabs - is carried out in the same way as with the "old" technology, therefore, the time for cladding will be 3.9 years.

Since all operations are performed sequentially, the total construction time of the Cheops pyramid is: 6.3 + 4.5 + 3.9 = 14.7 years, and using the utilization factor of the technological chain of 0.75 we have - 14.7: 0.75 = 19.6 years.
Let's sum up some results. So, the pyramid was built in the shortest possible time, which Herodotus mentioned from the words of the priests. All one hundred thousand slaves are involved, however, even here, with the exception of a few thousand, 13.5 years after the hill is torn down, they may be left without work. But what if the great architect, who planned to tear down the hill and cut out the Cheops pyramid from it, decided not to miss the ideal opportunity to use the entire massif of the hill? Then it is easy to assume that all three pyramids - Cheops, Khafre and Menkaure - represent a single architectural complex, made by one builder, and at the same time. If this was indeed the case, then for this purpose it was possible to use a huge number of workers who were not fully loaded when creating the first pyramid. In this case, the construction of the entire complex could last a little over 20 years. In addition, a huge amount of material extracted from the hill - lime blocks - could be used in the construction of various places of worship. For the construction of the other two pyramids, it was not necessary to orient them to the north with the help of a control pyramid, since it was possible to orientate them with the help of a more or less finished pyramid of Cheops. Perhaps for this reason, the tops of the pyramids of Khafre and Mykerin were not destroyed, while the top of the first pyramid disappeared.

How can one confirm or refute the stated hypothesis about the method of construction of the Great Pyramids at Giza?
There are several ways. The first, of course, is connected with the search for masonry inside the pyramid. It is necessary to check only those passages and rooms that are located above ground level and are not lined with any material. If traces of masonry from blocks are clearly visible, therefore, the hypothesis is incorrect. If the passages are punched in a solid monolith, this serves as an argument in its support.

The second method is very problematic, since it is associated with penetration into the pyramid from any of the four faces at a level slightly higher than the middle of the pyramid. In this case, when dismantling the reinforcing stones, a monolithic core will appear after about four meters.

The third method is not quite common, but it can also help. The fact is that when building pyramids, whether from bottom to top or top to bottom, it is necessary to check and measure the angles of inclination of all four faces. When erecting a structure from the bottom up, at the base of the pyramid there should be a square that appeared after the initial marking. When erecting masonry steps, errors in determining the angles of inclination are possible. But even small errors can lead to unpleasant consequences. So, for example, with an error in determining the angle of, say, half a degree, the crowning faces of the pyramid can move up or down by up to 1.5 m, and it will be a serious problem to bring all four faces at the top to one point. If you cut the pyramid from top to bottom, then, of course, the top will look perfect, but the sides of the base of the pyramid, due to small errors in measuring the angles of inclination of the faces, may differ in size. Moreover, these differences can be quite large, on the order of 1.5-2 m or more. Of course, for an observer below, the huge volume of the pyramid hides these differences, and they are not striking. Therefore, if there is a difference in the dimensions of the sides of the base, then this speaks in favor of the hypothesis that the pyramid was built from top to bottom.

IN various sources some data on the dimensions of the side of the base are given. These data differ from each other: from 230.35 to 233.16 m. And nowhere is it indicated which side was measured: north, east, south or west. Apparently, the researchers, convinced that the base of the pyramid was a square, measured only one side each time. By the way, in our time it is not so easy to make these measurements for the reason that the edges of all four faces are badly damaged by time and it is very difficult to find those points on the ground that are the true continuation of the edges.

Of course, for our purposes, one should not go to extremes and look for extra millimeters, or even centimeters. It is enough to convincingly prove that some side of the base of the pyramid differs from the others in length, that is, the base is not a square, but a quadrangle. And, finally, fourthly, one should look for fragments of limestone blocks cut down in ancient times, which remained during the construction of stone giants, under a thousand-year layer of sand, not far from the pyramids.

Yohed Don-Yahio

Chip Scanlan, journalist, writer, columnist. Translation Olga Dobrovidova.

The inverted pyramid, invented more than a century ago to take advantage of new communication technologies, remains a controversial but widespread method of news writing - and journalists of all kinds of media agree that it has a future in the 21st century.

In the inverted pyramid "up" is placed the most valuable information in the news, and then - the details in descending order of importance, to the least important at the very end. Historians argue when exactly this form of reporting was invented, but they agree that the invention of the telegraph spurred its development so that by the beginning of the 20th century it was widely used in newspapers and then still relatively young news agencies.

Journalism historian David T. Z. Mindich believes that one of the first inverted pyramid leads was written by a correspondent who reported on the assassination attempt on Abraham Lincoln in April 1865:

At the Associated Press

The President was shot in the theater tonight and may have been mortally wounded.

(in English language this example is slimmer, The President was shot in a theater tonight and is perhaps mortally wounded, because "president" is the passive subject in both parts of the sentence - so it is emphasized that who exactly shot the president, on this stage doesn't matter at all. If you're interested, you can see what the whole material looked like on the NYT website - approx. per.)

(More historical information can be found in my article "The Birth of the Inverted Pyramid: A Child of Technology, Business and History" (eng))

The pyramid should be large on top, because it should answer all the questions of the readers. The remaining details are arranged in descending order of importance. The rules of the inverted pyramid require the reporter to summarize the story, get to the heart and the point of it, quickly and concisely state the answer to the question "what's the news?". This approach answers the most important questions at the very beginning of the story, it gives the thesis and then supplements it with supporting material.

Journalism is “complicated” with an inverted pyramid. Proponents of this form find it useful, especially for breaking news. The inverted pyramid, or at least its most important part, the lead resume, is used very widely - it is one of the most recognizable forms in modern communications. You'll find it on the front and back pages of most newspapers, the Associated Press and around the world, on other news resources online.

“The inverted pyramid builds material not around ideas or chronology, but around facts. She weighs and shuffles various pieces of information, focusing with surprising focus on their relative eventual value,” writes journalism historian Mitchel Stevens ( ) in his History of the News.

Critics of the inverted pyramid say it is stilted, boring, artless, outdated, and one of the reasons newspapers have had to contend with the declining readership in recent decades.

The inverted pyramid, according to critics, is anti-history. She presents the material backwards and clashes with the traditional practice of storytelling, where there is a beginning, middle and end. Instead of rewarding the reader with a satisfying ending, the pyramid loses its momentum and fizzles out, as if even challenging readers whether they can stay awake, let alone read to the end.

Despite decades under attack, the inverted pyramid lives on. As Bruce DeSilva () of the Associated Press once famously said, “the inverted pyramid remains the Dracula of journalism: it never stops rising from the coffin and making its way into the newspaper.”

There are good reasons for this persistence. Many readers are impatient and want the material to get straight to the point. In situations of breaking news, when events and circumstances change rapidly, the inverted pyramid allows the author of the news to constantly rewrite its beginning, maintaining its relevance.

It is also a very useful tool for organized thinking, since the pyramid forces the journalist to express the meaning of the whole story in one paragraph. Journalism students who master the inverted pyramid and then go on to work in other industries say it is useful for writing anything from legal briefs to grant applications.

The inverted pyramid and lead resume can be a difficult form for some journalists. At least, it was difficult for me when I first started working. Retell three hours of a school board meeting or answer five W-questions (who, what did, where, when, why; in English, all these question words begin with the letter W - approx. per.) about a fatal car accident, and then deciding what other information is needed in the text and in what order - this required a lot of effort and was annoying, especially under the pressure of a deadline.

Also, as a beginner, I usually didn't know the topics I covered well enough to easily answer the big question: what would be the news stories in this event, and in what order of importance? I resisted the disciplined thinking required by the inverted pyramid and, like many colleagues, found the form uncreative and unnatural. I preferred a writer's approach to stories to a "just the facts" reporting style.

Over time, it became easier, and I began to understand how this form helps to develop the skills of critical thinking, analysis and synthesis, that is, the basis for clarity of thought and text. The inverted pyramid is the basic "building block" of journalistic style.

At the time of printing on casting typesetting machines (hot type; invented around the 1880s-1890s - approx. per.), when materials needed to fit into a limited area, the inverted pyramid allowed editors and even compositors who typeset the page in the back room to cut the text from the bottom if necessary - this did not require any journalistic judgment. Technology continues to have an impact: Research shows that computer news readers don't want to view more than one screen at a time, so it's no surprise that online media continues to make extensive use of the inverted pyramid. (In 1996, Jakob Nielsen (), an influential web usability expert, wrote about "inverted pyramids in cyberspace"). Whether we like it or not, journalists in the 21st century need to master this form.

Excerpt from the book (Oxford University Press; the original link to the book does not work, a different one is supplied - approx. per.)

In 1963, Barbara Minto became the first female consultant for the renowned McKinsey Company. Management noted Barbara's outstanding writing skills and sent her to London in 1966 to develop writing skills among the company's employees. It was McKinsey employees and customers who were Minto's first students. Barbara explored problems in writing texts, which consist in the fuzzy formulation of thoughts. Barbara Minto took up the study of the process of thinking, believing that it is precisely its features that underlie the ability of a person to clearly express his thoughts. Ultimately, this served as the basis for the development of the theory of the pyramid principle. Since 1973, Barbara has run her own company, Minto International Inc. She successfully teaches at the business schools of Harvard, Stanford, Chicago, as well as in largest companies USA and Europe. She specializes in teaching the golden rules to both business newbies and professionals whose duties include writing complex reports, analyses, memos and presentations.
These rules and the operation of the Minto Pyramid Principle are outlined by Barbara in the book of the same name. The meticulously compiled content of the book will be useful in mastering the skills business communication. But even a cursory acquaintance with the key ideas of the Minto Pyramid Principle will help to present any information logically, clearly and understandably.

LOGIC IN WRITING

1. Pyramid.
Ideas are necessarily grouped according to some criteria. The most effective method of presenting ideas is from top to bottom, so the correct grouping is presented in the form of a pyramid. Ideas within the pyramid must obey three "golden rules":
- The ideas at each level should summarize the ideas grouped below.
- The ideas of each group should be logically interconnected.
- The ideas of each group should go in a logical sequence.
For the correct drafting of the document, it is necessary to schematically reduce ideas into a pyramid and check it for compliance with the three "golden rules".

2. The components of the pyramid.
Using the pyramid structure, ideas are arranged vertically in the form of a question-answer dialogue, and horizontally in a logical connection based on the principle of induction or deduction, but without mixing these two methods. The introductory part of the document is written in narrative form and is a Question, the Answer to which is given by the rest of the document.

3. Building a pyramid.
Top down:
- Define the Subject.
- Define the Question.
- Give answer.
- Check that the situation and the Development of the situation lead to the Question.
- Check Answer.
- Complete the Main Level.

Upwards:
- Make a list of all the statements you would like to make.
- Determine the relationship between them.
- Draw conclusions.
- Write an introduction.

4. Features of writing an introduction.
An introductory section is written for each group of ideas at the Main Level and should briefly summarize and recall the ideas, not inform at length about them. The introductory part should consist of the Situation, Development of the Situation, Question and Answer.

5. Deduction and induction.
Deduction is a sequence of judgments that follow from each other. Induction involves the grouping of similar ideas or related activities. Therefore, at the Main Level, it is better to use the inductive method.

LOGIC IN REASONING

6. Establish a logical sequence.
A very important action aimed at identifying the relationship of ideas.
Types of logical sequence:
- Chronological - if you want to describe the process.
- Structural - if you need to describe the structure of something.
- Comparative - if the grouping is based on a classification according to the degree of significance.
To build your presentation in the best possible way, formulate each idea as briefly as possible -> group similar ideas -> arrange them in the appropriate sequence.
When describing actions, formulate each action as specifically as possible so that it represents a certain end product -> group together those actions that lead to the same result -> identify the process or structure that formed the basis of the grouping, and arrange the ideas in the appropriate sequence ->
If a situation is being described, group similar ideas -> identify the structure behind the grouping -> formulate the ideas as complete sentences and arrange them in the appropriate order -> make sure you don't miss anything.

7. Generalization of grouped ideas
Ideas within the same group should mutually exclude each other, and taken all together - exhaustively characterize the subject (the MECE rule works here - Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive).
When generalizing ideas that describe actions, it is necessary to group them depending on the result achieved. When summarizing ideas that describe a situation, they should be grouped according to the feature that unites them. Finding a unifying characteristic of ideas is quite simple - all similar ideas will refer to the same subject, or the same action will be considered in all of them, or they will all be directed to the same object, or they will all imply the same and the same statement.
We structure the ideas as follows.
Action Ideas: Summarize the ideas, leaving only keywords-> define the level of abstraction -> formulate ideas as clearly as possible -> define the result of their implementation.
Ideas that describe the situation: find similarities in subjects, actions or objects -> determine the category that unites them -> formulate a conclusion.

LOGIC IN PROBLEM SOLVING

8. Problem definition
The problem is determined by the following course of action:
- Identify the area in which the problem arose.
- Determine what disrupted the stability in this area.
- Identify Undesired Outcome P1.
- Define Desired Outcome P2.
- Check if any action has been taken to solve the problem.
- Determine the Question to be answered in the study.
The resulting problem definition should be used in the introductory part of the document.

9. Structuring the problem analysis process
Here you can use logical tree diagrams to search possible ways solving a problem and identifying the relationship between the ideas of one group. But first, define the problem -> use research models to visualize the structure of the problem area -> put forward several hypotheses about the possible causes of the problem -> collect information that confirms or refutes the hypotheses.

LOGIC IN PRESENTATIONS

10. Displaying an Idea Pyramid on Document Pages
Visualize document structure with headings, indents, underlining, bolding, and numbering.
Use links to move from one group of ideas to another.

11. Displaying a pyramid of ideas on the screen.
when creating text slides, express your thoughts as concisely and simply as possible. Use slides with images to visually demonstrate data, be sure to provide it with a title. Sketch the presentation for the correct order of the slides. Frequent rehearsals will help you deliver an effective presentation.

12. Displaying a pyramid of ideas in writing.
Describe, mentally created by you, the image of what you want to talk about.

Although the book is intended for a wide range of readers, the abundance practical examples from life consulting company in many ways will be useful to employees in this field of activity.

Barbara Minto "The Minto Pyramid Principle: The Golden Rules of Thinking" business letter and oral presentations" [translated from English by I.I. Yurchik, Yu.I. Yurchik]. - M.: Mann, Ivanov and Ferber, 2008. - 272p.
Barbara Minto "The Minto Pyramid Principle. Logic in writing, thinking and problem solving"