How To Organise The Information In Documents: Getting the Structure Right - Part 1

Process, Paradigm, and Persistence

The Need
We need more information about how to organise the information in documents. We have lots of information on language and a fair bit on design; but there isn’t so much on structure. Also, what we do have on structure tends to be more about the hallmarks of a well-structured document rather than about how to create one — more about the goals themselves than how to score them.

The Difficulty
The hardest part of making documents as clear as they can be is getting the structure right. It is for me anyway.

* Where to start?
* Which ideas to group together?
* What order to put them in?

It's the same whether I am writing an insurance policy, a prospectus, a letter of advice to a client, an essay for university, or an article for Clarity. Part of the problem is that — even with a clear idea of my audience and the purpose for writing — I'm not always sure just what I'm going to say, just where it is that I'm going.

The struggle to remove that insecurity eases as soon as the structure comes good — although the structure may morph several times as other issues, and my thinking, become clearer.

The Importance
Getting the structure right is vital if a document is going to be useful for its audience. As the Law Reform Commission of Victoria has said:

The success of a document in communicating depends greatly on the careful organisation of the material in it. The right facts must not only be selected, but must also be put in an order that shows the interconnections between the facts, that allows one fact to support or qualify the other. Incisive clarity of thinking, sensitive consideration of the audience, skilful choice of language, and thoughtful attention to all the other components in the writing process can all be undermined by slipshod organisation. [Law Reform Commission of Victoria, Plain English and the Law, Appendix 1, Drafting Manual 1987, page 17]

Absolute rigour is essential. Poor structure often reflects muddled thinking. And muddled thinking causes communications to fail.

These Articles
The first part of this series sets the scene and considers three examples that reveal the problems of poor structure.

The latter parts deal with:

* discussing a process and a paradigm for achieving the goals of good structure; and
* contains a detailed analysis of a before-and-after example.

I should say right at the outset that much of the material about the process and paradigm discussed in Part 2 is from others — notably Bryan A. Garner (from an article about a paradigm developed by Dr. Betty S. Flowers), Professor Joseph Kimble, and the Law Reform Commission of Victoria (the work being done by the Commission's chair, David Kelly). The purpose of this article is to bring their ideas together, add some of my own, and perhaps encourage others to contribute their thoughts.

If enough people share their ideas, we could effectively have a "Seminar in Print" dealing with structure.