Raw

## Audit — Fixture 07: headings audit

Scope note: only the opening is available. Findings below concern what is on the page; where a judgment would require the body, it is marked as unverifiable rather than assumed.

**Legend:** ▲ top/answer · ● first-level group · ○ support · ⚠ violation · ↑ buried conclusion · ⇄ wrong order · ⊗ overlap · ⊕ gap · ✂ cut/move

### Annotated opening

> ⚠ This memorandum describes how project teams identify and deliver significant
> profit improvements. 〔statement of purpose — names the topic, answers nothing; ⊕ no reader question, ▲ no answer〕
>
> ⚠ It is organized in six sections: 〔more than 3–4 groups; a list of headings is not a key line〕
>
> - ⚠ Background 〔run-up by definition — no Complication it can serve, ✂ candidate〕
> - ⚠ Principles of the project-team approach 〔topic label, kind: mechanics〕
> - ⚠ Definition of project work 〔topic label, kind: parts-of-a-whole; likely support, not a first-level group, ✂ demote〕
> - ⚠ Organization of the program 〔topic label, kind: mechanics; ⊗ probable overlap with "Principles"〕
> - ●↑ Distinctive benefits and results 〔the only heading shaped like a payoff — the reader's reason to care, buried fifth〕
> - ⚠ Conditions required for success 〔kind: requirements/risks — third kind in one group〕

### Findings

| # | Location | Violation | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Opening sentence | No answer anywhere in the opening (statement of purpose, not SCQ); the reader's question — most plausibly "should we adopt the project-team approach / what will it get us" — is never raised, let alone answered | Replace the purpose statement with an SCQ intro in story form and a one-sentence answer |
| 2 | Section list | Six first-level groups against the 3–4 ceiling | Collapse to 3–4 groups of one kind |
| 3 | Section list | Mixed kinds: mechanics ("Principles", "Organization"), parts ("Definition"), payoff ("Benefits"), requirements ("Conditions") — no single plural noun covers them | Re-derive the kind from the reader's question; for "why should we do this", the first level is reasons/payoffs, with mechanics demoted underneath as supports |
| 4 | Section list | Order unexplainable — neither time, structure, ranking, nor deduction can be named for this sequence | Assign and name one order (ranking by size of benefit fits a reasons pyramid) |
| 5 | "Distinctive benefits and results" | Buried logic: the one element that answers "what do we get" sits fifth of six | Promote the payoff logic to the top/first level |
| 6 | "Background" / "Definition" | Run-up and definition presented as first-level peers of the argument; "Background" has no visible Complication to serve | Cut or fold into the SCQ intro; move "Definition" under the group it supports or to an appendix |
| 7 | "Principles" vs "Organization" | Probable overlap (⊗) — cannot be confirmed without the body; full MECE and vertical checks unverifiable from headings alone | Verify against the body; merge if their contents coincide |

### Score — 2 / 10 — not structured yet

| Axis | Score | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Top | 0 | Topic label; no answer on the page |
| Same-kind groups | 0 | At least three kinds in one group |
| Order | 0 | No explicable ordering principle |
| MECE | 1 | Probable overlap visible; completeness unverifiable without the body |
| Display | 1 | Sections are listed, but headings are topic words — the skeleton carries no argument |

### Three fixes that buy the most

1. Open with the answer to the reader's real question (what adopting the approach is worth), framed by a short SCQ intro — delete the statement of purpose.
2. Promote "benefits and results" into the key line: make the first-level groups the payoffs, ordered by ranking, and hang principles/organization/definition under them as supports.
3. Cut "Background" and "Definition" from the first level — fold the minimum necessary context into the intro, the rest into an appendix.

I can rewrite the opening in `write` mode once the body (or at least its key facts) is available — the material for a proper answer-first top is not in this excerpt.