Cutting a Report Without Losing the Argument
You are the communications editor for a retail company. A 420-word internal report must be cut to a 250-word briefing for a board of nine non-specialist directors. The report contains these figures: n=1,240; response rate 22%; customer churn fell from 9.1% to 7.8% (p=0.04), driven mainly by the SME segment; the effect was not replicated in the enterprise segment (n=190). It also contains three methodological caveats, two recommendations, and a reference to a technical appendix that the board will not receive. The board meets in 48 hours. The chair has said she wants 'one clear ask' and has warned that last month's paper was 'too dense to act on'. The original report's central recommendation is to extend a loyalty discount for six months, at a cost of £180,000. You must decide what to keep, what to cut, how to phrase the uncertainty around p=0.04, and how to end with a single action.
1. Select the three pieces of quantitative information you would keep in the 250-word briefing and justify each inclusion.
Read the worked answer
Keep three numbers: (1) churn 9.1% to 7.8%. This is the outcome the board is being asked to fund, and the direction is clear even if the size is uncertain. (2) The SME/enterprise split. It shows the effect is concentrated, so a blanket rollout may overpromise; the enterprise n=190 is small and should be labelled as such. (3) £180,000 for six months. The board cannot make a cost decision without the price. I would cut n=1,240 and the 22% response rate from the body and put them in a one-line methodological footnote. I would also cut the technical appendix reference, because the board will not receive it; an inaccessible reference weakens rather than supports the argument. The two recommendations should be reduced to one ask.
2. Rewrite this sentence for the board in no more than 35 words, keeping the uncertainty: 'Churn fell from 9.1% to 7.8% (p=0.04), driven mainly by the SME segment; the effect was not replicated in the enterprise segment (n=190).'
Read the worked answer
Rewrite (32 words): 'Churn fell from 9.1% to 7.8%. The fall was statistically significant but modest, and it came mainly from small and medium-sized customers; we did not see the same effect in larger accounts (190 customers).'
The rewrite keeps the direction, size, and limitation. It replaces p=0.04 with 'statistically significant but modest' and immediately qualifies it. It avoids implying the result applies to all customers.
3. Explain how you would end the briefing with 'one clear ask' while acknowledging the caveats.
Read the worked answer
End with one sentence that names the decision, the amount, and the condition: 'We ask the board to approve £180,000 for a six-month extension, targeted at SME customers, with a review at three months.' Then add one caveat sentence before it, not after it: 'The evidence is strongest for SMEs and not yet replicated in enterprise accounts.' Putting the caveat before the ask prevents the board from hearing the request as unconditional. Do not end with 'more research is needed' unless you also say who will do it, by when, and what decision it will inform.