Raw

**Legend:** ▲ top/answer · ● first-level group · ⚠ violation · ↑ buried conclusion · ⇄ wrong order · ⊕ gap

```text
▲/⚠ This memorandum describes how project teams identify and deliver significant
profit improvements. [statement of purpose — names the topic, answers nothing]
It is organized in six sections:

    ● Background                                    [⚠ not same-kind with rest]
    ● Principles of the project-team approach        [⚠ mixed kind]
    ● Definition of project work                     [⚠ mixed kind]
    ● Organization of the program                    [⚠ mixed kind]
    ● Distinctive benefits and results                [⚠ mixed kind]
    ● Conditions required for success                 [⚠ mixed kind]
⇄ no stated ordering principle
```

## Findings

| Location | Violation | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Opening sentence | Top is a purpose statement ("describes how…"), not an answer. No reader question is ever posed or closed. | Determine the reader's real question (likely "should we adopt this approach / what will it get us") and state the answer as a claim, e.g. "Project teams deliver profit improvements of X through Y." |
| Six-item list overall | Not same-kind: mixes a topic label (Background), a method description (Principles, Definition, Organization), an outcome (Distinctive benefits and results), and a precondition (Conditions required for success). Fails the "one plural noun" test. | Re-derive the kind from the reader's question. If the question is "why adopt this," the first level should be reasons/benefits, not a table of contents of sections. |
| Ordering of the six headings | No explicit ordering principle (not time, not structure, not ranking, not deduction/induction) — reads as recall order. | Name and apply one order type once the correct kind of grouping is settled. |
| "Background" heading | Classic anti-pattern heading — sits at a different level of abstraction than the other five and answers nothing itself. | Fold into the story (Situation/Complication) as prose, not as a first-level branch. |
| Whole intro | No SCQ present — no Situation, no Complication, no Question on the page. The reader is never told what changed or why this document exists now. | Supply Situation → Complication → Question before the Answer; currently absent entirely (not just buried). |

## Score

| Axis | Score |
|---|---|
| Top | 0 — no answer, only a purpose statement |
| Same-kind groups | 0 — six headings of different kinds |
| Order | 0 — unexplainable, no stated principle |
| MECE | 1 — can't fully assess without body, but visible overlap risk between "Principles," "Definition," and "Organization" |
| Display | 1 — headings are visible and numbered-by-list, but they don't mirror a real hierarchy |

**Total: 2/10 — not structured yet**

## Top three fixes

1. Replace the purpose statement with an actual answer to the reader's question.
2. Re-derive the six headings as one same-kind group (reasons, or steps, or benefits — pick one) rather than a table of contents.
3. Add an explicit Situation → Complication → Question before the Answer.