myBusinessArchitectmyBusinessArchitectmyBusinessArchitectmyBusinessArchitectJames Firth looked at Marcus's forty pages of architecture evidence and said: "Three pages or fewer." The board's consent agenda had fourteen items. By item nine, they were scanning. If the recommendation was not at the bottom of page one, the board would approve whatever the executive committee recommended and move on. That constraint changed how Marcus wrote. He could not start with the methodology or build from the data up. He had to start with the decision and work backward: what does the board need to decide, what evidence makes the case, what are the options, what happens if they do nothing? This chapter teaches that discipline. Decision briefs. Investment cases. Multi-altitude documents that serve three different readers in a single package. And the editing rigour that makes three pages more effective than forty.
By the end of this chapter, you'll be able to:
The clean energy brief had gone to the province. Lakeshore won its share of the $200M funding. But the external win created an internal problem. The board now needed to approve the capability investment plan that would let Lakeshore deliver on its clean energy commitment while closing the capability gaps that the Design4 assessment had identified across Business Programs and Skilled Trades.
Marcus had the findings. He had the capability heat map, the gap assessment, the investment estimates, the phased timeline, the risk assessment for each option. He had, in total, about forty pages of architecture work that supported the recommendation. He brought it to James Firth to discuss the board submission.
James looked at the stack and said, "Marcus, the board's consent agenda has fourteen items this quarter. The capability investment is item nine. Every board member will have read the financial statements, the audit committee report, and the enrolment update before they get to your document. By item nine, they are scanning. If you cannot get to the recommendation by the bottom of page one, the board will approve whatever the executive committee recommended and move on. Three pages or fewer."
Marcus started to explain the complexity. The investment involved three faculties, two external partnerships, a phased hiring plan, and a capability maturity trajectory that spanned eighteen months. Three pages could not possibly contain all of that.
"Three pages or fewer," James repeated. "Everything else goes in the appendix. The appendix is for the two board members who will actually read it. The brief is for the twelve who will not."
That constraint changed how Marcus wrote. He could not start with the methodology. He could not build from the data up. He had to start with the decision and work backward: what does the board need to decide, what evidence makes the case, what are the options, and what happens if they do nothing? Every sentence had to earn its place in a document the board had not asked to read.
This chapter teaches that discipline. In Chapter 3, you learned to tell the architecture story: narrative arc, the question-first principle, the "so what" discipline. This chapter is about the written form of that skill. Decision briefs. Investment cases. Multi-altitude documents that serve three different readers in a single package. And the editing rigour that makes three pages more effective than forty.
Curriculum Connection: In Closing the Strategy-Execution Gap (COR-BA-100), the clean energy brief appeared as a strategic success: Lakeshore won the funding. Here you see the writing discipline behind it. James Firth's "three pages or fewer" constraint forced Marcus to start with the decision, not the methodology. The evidence was the same capability model from COR-BA-100. The difference was editorial discipline: every sentence had to earn its place in a document the board had not asked to read. This chapter teaches that discipline.
Create a free account to access Communicating Business Architecture and start learning.