Raw

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

## Annotated opening

```text
⚠ ✂ "This memorandum describes how project teams identify and deliver
   significant profit improvements." — statement of purpose, not an answer.
   Names the topic; the reader learns nothing they can act on.
⊕ No Situation, no Complication, no Question anywhere: the reader is never
   told what changed or what choice is open, so no question is live.
⚠ "It is organized in six sections:" — a table of contents standing in for
   a key line.

●⚠ Background                                  ✂ label, not a claim; and a
                                                  "Background" heading sits at
                                                  a different level of
                                                  abstraction than the rest
●⚠ Principles of the project-team approach      ⊗ overlaps "Definition" and
                                                  "Organization"
●⚠ Definition of project work                   ⊗ overlaps "Principles"
●⚠ Organization of the program                  ⊗ overlaps "Principles"
●⚠ Distinctive benefits and results             — the only element of the kind
                                                  the reader's question demands
●⚠ Conditions required for success              ⇄ requirements, a fourth kind
⇄ Six elements, no stateable ordering principle: not time, not structure,
   not ranking.
⊕ Every heading is a topic word, so nothing below is summarized by
   anything above — no parent on this list makes a claim its section
   could ground.
```

## Findings

| Location | Violation | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| First sentence | No answer anywhere in the visible opening — and none is promised. The reader deciding whether to adopt project teams needs the payoff stated: what they will gain and what it costs them. | Replace the purpose statement with the one-sentence answer the body supports |
| Whole opening | No SCQ: no Situation the reader accepts, no Complication forcing a choice, no Question the memo closes | Open with the situation and the turn, in prose, so the reader arrives at the question already asking it |
| Six headings | Mixed kinds in one group: concepts (Principles, Definition), a method (Organization), payoffs (Benefits and results), requirements (Conditions), plus a non-element (Background) | Re-derive the kind from the reader's question, then refill the group |
| Principles / Definition / Organization | Overlap — all three describe the same mechanics of how project teams work | Merge into one branch; the three become supports under it |
| Six headings | At most four first-level groups; six signals the split is by recall, not by structure | Regroup; the merge above already brings the count down |
| "Background" | Not a first-level element at all — a level-of-abstraction break | Delete the heading; its content becomes the Situation in the intro |
| Six headings | No explicable order | Choose and apply one order type |

## Score

| Axis | Score |
|---|---|
| Top | 0 — purpose statement, no answer |
| Same-kind groups | 0 — four kinds plus a non-element |
| Order | 0 — no stateable principle |
| MECE | 0 — three overlapping branches, no named field to check coverage against |
| Display | 1 — the six-part skeleton is visible, but the hierarchy is one flat list of topics |

**1 / 10 — not structured yet.**

## The three fixes that buy the most

1. State the answer in the first line: what project teams are worth to this reader, in one sentence.
2. Collapse Principles, Definition and Organization into a single mechanics branch, then find the second real payoff branch among them.
3. Turn "Background" into two or three sentences of Situation and Complication that make the question live, and put the question on the page.

Say the word and I'll run `write` on this — though the body isn't available, so it would be a skeleton, not a draft.