Structuring Compelling Arguments

High-performing teams argue purposefully. I’ve seen this over and over in my career. While others get over-emotional and reactive during disagreements, the best teams disagree 𝘦𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘺. There are 6 steps to having effective “arguments” at work: 𝟭. 𝗗𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗥𝗼𝗹𝗲𝘀 In any debate, it's vital for participants to understand their roles. Are you there to make the final decision, offer fresh ideas, or passionately defend your viewpoint? Clear roles ensure everyone knows their purpose and contributes constructively to the discussion. 𝟮. 𝗙𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗼𝗻 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀 Rather than fixating on individual positions, effective arguments focus on common interests. Identify shared goals and objectives that can guide the conversation toward a collaborative solution rather than a divisive one. 𝟯. 𝗕𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱 𝗕𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗕𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 Before challenging an idea, strive to enhance it. Encourage team members to develop and strengthen an argument before attempting to deconstruct others' viewpoints. This approach promotes a more robust and constructive debate. 𝟰. 𝗘𝗺𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝘂𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 Strong arguments are supported by data and intuition. It's essential to justify your stance and how you arrived at that conclusion. At the same time, you’re a human being. Combining factual evidence with your intuitive insights adds depth and credibility to your argument. 𝟱. 𝗕𝗲 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 This may seem obvious, but: Effective debate requires a willingness to have your mind changed. Enter the discussion with an open mind, ready to consider and allow yourself to be moved by the better argument if it arises. This demonstrates intellectual humility and promotes a culture of continuous learning. 𝟲. 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗹𝘆 𝗦𝗺𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘁𝘀 Effective arguments need constraints. They keep them on track and prevent them from becoming unproductive or overly emotional. These constraints could include: • time limits • sticking to certain topics • not allowing the conversation to become too personal The goal is to enter with many ideas and emerge with the best one. – Remember: iron sharpens iron. Strong teams don’t shy away from arguments. They embrace them, stay in them, and ultimately push each other to higher ground and bigger possibilities.

Arguing a case is not about oratory — it’s about precision and preparation Over time, I’ve realised that effective advocacy lies not in oratory, but in the presentation of facts merged seamlessly with the applicable law. I want to share my practice of preparing notes for final oral arguments, particularly in suits and appeals (though the approach is similar for writs). 1.Start with the Issues Begin by identifying the issues framed and the onus of proof on each. Everything that follows must flow from this foundation. 2. Map the Record Scan pleadings, evidence, and documents carefully. Note the exact paragraphs and page numbers that support the issues where the onus lies on your side. Precise marking of relevant portions keeps the argument anchored and helps you hold the Court’s attention. 3. Engage the Judge While arguing, ensure the Court is following your path. Phrases like “Has your Lordship got it?” or “Please see page 47, paragraph 9” are not interruptions, they help you and the Judge remain on the same page, literally and mentally. 4. Merge Law with Facts Never argue facts in isolation. State the proposition of law, cite the authority, and merge it with your facts. This discipline keeps submissions precise and persuasive. 5. Anticipate the Other Side If time permits, become your own devil’s advocate. Identify the strongest points for the opposite side, and prepare your legal response. And if, after full preparation, you find the law is clearly against you — make a gracious concession. It saves the Court’s time and earns you credibility. For me, this “surgical” approach ensures that the Judge rarely misses the point and that I rarely lose track of mine. #Advocacy #CourtroomSkills #LitigationStrategy #LegalPractice #Preparation #OralArguments #TrialLawyers

Never miss a chance to persuade the judge with clarity and concision‼️  One of the best places to do this❓ The Table of Contents. Here’s why and how. 💡 The first place I turn in every brief is the Table of Contents; it’s the Cliff’s notes of an advocate’s entire brief. Based solely on the Table of Contents – and specifically the outline of the headings and subheadings under the Argument - I can often get a strong sense of how I might resolve the case. How can you make this portion of your brief pack a persuasive punch❓ Focus on both content and form. Here are some things to consider: 💎 Content. 🔹 Start with single-sentence headings that present clear and complete statements of your legal arguments. Focus on the legal aspect of the arguments without getting bogged down in the procedure.  🔸 Appellants, organize the headings based on the strength of the arguments, from strongest to weakest, considering the relief you may receive (i.e., dismissal of the charges entirely before a new trial).  🔸 Appellees, it is generally easier for me to follow your argument when your headings match the order of the appellant’s headings. However, this is not always the best practice; if you have a strong legal argument that, if successful, disposes of the entire case, put that first. 🔹 Underneath each heading, include supportive subheadings. The subheadings can be full sentences or sentence fragments. The subheadings should lead the reader logically through the most compelling legal and operative factual support for the relevant heading.   🔹 If the standard of review is favorable, tailor heading to reflect the standard or include the standard in a subheading.   🔹 Standing alone, a heading and its subheadings should encapsulate one argument. All the headings and their subheadings together should encapsulate your entire argument. 💎 Form. For readability and impact: 🔹 Use parallel structure by maintaining consistent phrasing and format across all headings and subheadings.  🔹 Use normal sentence capitalization – don’t use all capital letters and don’t capitalize the first letter of each word like a book title. (subject to your jurisdiction’s rules).  🔹 Use bold and italics strategically – if every word is emphasized, no word is emphasized. 🔹 Use proper outline format.  🔸 Headings should be indented from the rest of the Table of Contents entries.  🔸 Subheadings should be indented from the headings, and so forth.  🔸 Headings and subheadings should be single spaced, with double space in between.  🔸 Paragraphs should have hanging indents to help distinguish between the outline markers and the text. 💡 The cumulative effect of this formatting allows me to distinguish your argument outline from the rest of the Table of Contents, and allows me to process your argument quickly and easily. Which example below 👇 👇 packs a more powerful punch⁉️

𝗠𝗼𝗼𝘁 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗢𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗥𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝘀: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗪𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗕𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗦𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗸 Most mooters think oral rounds are about speaking well. Wrong. They are about winning before you even open your mouth. Here’s how: 𝟭) 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 𝟯𝟬 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱𝘀 The moment you step up, the judges have already formed an impression. Your body language, the way you arrange your papers, your eye contact- it all speaks before your words do. 𝗪𝗮𝗹𝗸 𝗶𝗻 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘄𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲. 𝟮) 𝗔𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗕𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝗔𝘀𝗸𝗲𝗱 The best mooters don't just respond to questions; they preempt them. While drafting, make a list of every possible question a skeptical judge could ask and weave the answers naturally into your submissions. If you wait for them to ask, you are already on the backfoot. 𝟯) 𝗧𝘂𝗿𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗻 𝗔𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿’ 𝗧𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗸 When a judge interrupts, don’t see it as a roadblock- see it as an opportunity. Judges often ask questions to test you, not to trap you. Here’s a formula: Judge: “Counsel, isn’t your argument contradictory to [X] precedent?” Bad Response: “Um, no, because…” Winning Response: “Indeed, My Lordship raises a crucial point. However, this case is distinguishable because…” This way, you validate their concern before turning it in your favor. 𝟰) 𝗦𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗶𝗻 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 Judges have short attention spans. Don’t ramble. Structure your submissions like this: “My arguments are in three parts. First, jurisdiction. Second, breach. Third, damages.” Then, when making a point: “On jurisdiction, the respondent argues X, but we submit Y for three reasons…” Each point should be a mini-story with a clear entry and exit. 𝟱) 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 ‘𝗦𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲’ Most mooters rush their arguments. The best ones know when to pause. A well-placed pause after a strong argument makes the judge think about it. It shows control. 𝗠𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝟯-𝘀𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲: - State your argument. - Pause. - Let it sink in. 𝟲) 𝗠𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘇𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 𝟮 𝗠𝗶𝗻𝘂𝘁𝗲𝘀 & 𝗟𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝟮 𝗦𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 Even the best speakers feel nervous at the start. Have your opening locked in so you don’t fumble. Similarly, the last two lines should be impactful. Never end weakly. Bad: “That’s all from me.” Good: “For these reasons, we respectfully submit that the appeal should be allowed.” 𝟳) 𝗧𝗵𝗲 ‘𝗘𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗘𝘅𝗶𝘁’ 𝗟𝗶𝗻𝗲 If you don’t know an answer, don’t panic. Have a pre-prepared exit line. Example: “That is an excellent point, My Lord, and while I do not have the exact authority at hand, I would be happy to submit a supplementary note.” It’s about how you recover, not about never making mistakes. Mooting isn’t just about law, it’s about performance. Now go own that podium.

Judge Stephanos Bibas’s opinion in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence is a gem of judicial writing. If you love sharp reasoning wrapped in compelling prose, you’re in for a treat. The judge has built a reputation for decisions that don’t just decide cases—they persuade, engage, and even entertain. His writing is clear, structured, and packed with rhetorical techniques that any lawyer should use. Let’s break down what makes this opinion a masterclass in legal writing. ➡️ Start Strong, Signal the Stakes When writing a legal argument, don’t just dump background information at the top. Use an opening that signals importance, raises curiosity, or frames the issue in a way that engages. ➡️ Frame the Story with a Clear Narrative When introducing a case or legal issue, don’t drown your reader in details right away. Start with the big picture: Who are the key players? What’s the core dispute? Why does it matter? ➡️ Use Metaphors to Drive Home Key Legal Points Legal writing is often abstract. One way to make it stick? Use metaphors to turn legal concepts into something concrete. Look for ways to explain legal concepts through comparisons to everyday things. ➡️ Prime Your Reader Before Delivering the Key Takeaway Introduce the rules, show why they apply, and only then deliver the takeaway. Before delivering major rulings, Judge Bibas prepares the reader with careful priming. ➡️ Use Short, Punchy Sentences to Hammer Home Critical Points Judge Bibas’s writing stands out for its clarity, and one reason is that he knows when to cut the fluff and hit hard with short sentences. When you want something to land, ditch the long sentences and legalese. Say it plainly. Swipe through the carousel 👉🏻 to dive deeper into each example. - I’m Joe Regalia, a law professor and legal writing trainer. Follow me and tap the 🔔 so you won't miss any posts.

McKinsey charges $500,000+ for a single presentation. Here’s their simple framework—free to use. McKinsey presentations follow a clear, structured formula. The secret? Story, flow, and structured arguments. Every new analyst is trained in this blueprint: ✔ One-slide introduction & context ✔ Always lead with the conclusion ✔ Pyramid argument structure ✔ Slide titles that tell a clear story Let's break it down so you can apply it too: 1️⃣ Set the Stage with the SCQA Framework Before diving into your solution, establish WHY your audience should care. Use SCQA to structure your introduction: → Situation – What’s the current state? → Complication – What problem needs solving? → Question – What’s the key question to answer? → Answer – Tease the solution (this gets its own slide next). This builds anticipation and hooks your audience. 2️⃣ Lead With the Answer. Don’t bury your conclusion—put it front and center. Once your audience knows the what, use the Pyramid Principle to explain the why: → Back your conclusion with 3–5 key arguments → Support each argument with data & evidence → 1 argument per slide—keep it clear and focused → No redundancy—nothing overlaps, nothing is missing → Extra details? Put them in the appendix This keeps your presentation concise and persuasive. 3️⃣ Let Slide Titles Tell the Story Busy executives don’t read slides—they scan titles. A great slide title should: → Present the main takeaway of the slide → Clearly state the key argument → Answer “So what?”—why does this matter? Your audience should understand the core message just by reading the slide titles. 4️⃣ Support Titles with Data & Context Once your title delivers the main point, use the slide content to back it up: → Explain how the data supports the takeaway → Show relevant data & insights → Provide context so the argument is clear The slide shouldn’t tell a different story than the title—they must align. ✅ Save this post as a cheat sheet for your next presentation: → Set the stage with SCQA → Lead with the answer → Use slide titles to tell the full story → Break down arguments using the Pyramid Principle → Support titles with clear data & insights This is how McKinsey makes complex topics easy to digest—and how you can too. 💭 What do you think? ♻️ Repost if this resonated.

Do you struggle with trying to convince clients and colleagues of your solutions and ideas? Maybe you are missing one of the three key components to a strong argument. Here are four questions to ask yourself that will help you identify any weak points so that you can be more persuasive. 1. Is your purpose for sharing the solution/idea clear? If you yourself are unsure about why your idea is important, others will also wonder what you are trying to accomplish. 2. Is the solution/idea you present clear and concise? Jumping into details of the solution before presenting a clear and concise vision often confuses people. Just because you can think quickly and deeply about a solution does not mean that others can, too. You may need to state something that you believe is obvious before you do anything else. Don't worry! You can do this without being condescending. In this way, everyone starts from the same assumption or understanding. 3. Did you support your solution/idea? Making the claim alone is not enough to convince people of your solution's/idea's merit. Provide some evidence that your solution/idea is worthwhile. Explain or illustrate your idea/solution in a way that listeners will FEEL confident--do your best to connect it to their everyday experiences. 4. Did you clearly state how your solution/idea is better than others? Voicing your consideration of other solutions/ideas is a powerful way to be persuasive, especially if you have evidence that shows why these alternatives are insufficient. I know that I feel better about what people propose when they demonstrate that they have considered other ideas and tell me why they won't work. How about you? These are some of the ideas that I shared in a recent live call with HUB members who are building their spoken communication skills. One member will use these tips to convince people to institute textile recycling programs in their companies to grow the circular economy. Another will apply this information towards helping her clients by convincing the behind-the-scenes tech team to prioritize fixing the bugs that are negatively impacting clients' user experience. How might you apply these 4 questions to strengthening your arguments today? 💁🏽 comment to share your thoughts 🔔 ring the profile bell for notifications of content 📂 save this for your personal LinkedIn library 🫶 repost so that other people see this, too ________________________________ Hello there! I post regularly about how climate solutions professionals and advocates can communicate confidently in English so they can be understood and make a stronger impact in the world.🌎 PS: DM me here on LinkedIn if you're a professional or advocate in a sustainability-related industry who wants to speak English more effectively and confidently. #sustainability,  #environment,  #communicationcoach,  #greentech,  #CareerDevelopment #StartSpeakingSustainably

Ever spent weeks writing a research report only to hear: “What’s the takeaway?” “I didn’t read it.” “Can you summarize it for us?” Yeah. Me too. Until I started using the Pyramid Principle. Now every report starts with the answer. And stakeholders actually act on it. Here’s the structure I use every time: 1. Start with the answer [User behavior] happens because [reason] or [Key problem] is caused by [main insight] Examples: Instead of: “We interviewed 20 users to understand the signup flow.” Try: “Users abandon signup because they don’t trust the verification step.” Instead of: “We explored why users don’t activate.” Try: “Users don’t activate because the core value is hidden behind setup.” 2. Break it down into 2-4 key reasons Ask: Why is this happening? Examples: “Users abandon checkout because they don’t trust it.” → (1) No security messaging → (2) Unclear next steps → (3) Poor error handling Tips: - Use clear numbers: “40% drop off at Step 2” - Don’t blend: Keep each reason focused and distinct 3. Back it up with evidence Pair each argument with: • 1 stat (quant) • 1 quote (qual) Example structure: Argument: Users don’t trust the payment process Quant: 40% drop-off at Step 2 Qual: “I didn’t feel safe entering my card” – Interview #6 That way, if they only read one page, they get the point.

This is one of the most important lessons I was going to teach my interns this week... It's a simple writing technique that's won me more cases than anything I learned in law school: Start every paragraph with a topic sentence. That's it. Sounds too simple to matter? It's not. I've come to believe most judges only read the first sentence of each paragraph in legal briefs. The rest is just supporting evidence. A truly effective brief is one where you could read nothing but the topic sentences and still understand the entire argument. Most lawyers fail at this because they write paragraphs without even understanding what their own paragraph is about. Then they expect the reader to figure it out. Let me give you a real example from a recent brief: "Defendant's claim that Philadelphia is an improper venue is meritless; the record overwhelmingly supports venue and convenience here." That single sentence tells you exactly what the rest of the paragraph will prove. Next paragraph: "Venue is proper and, by extension, convenient because this employment case has substantial connections to Pennsylvania." Again, you immediately know what's coming. This approach isn't just for legal writing. It works for: • Client emails • Business proposals • Any persuasive writing When you structure writing this way, you're doing the mental heavy lifting for your reader. You're creating a clear path through your argument. The truth is, most busy decision-makers skim. Give them a document where the first sentence of each paragraph tells the whole story, and you've given them exactly what they need. Try this in your next important document. See if it changes how people respond. I'm not saying I'm Bryan Garner or anything. What's your most valuable writing tip?

Advocacy isn’t just about arguing a case—it’s about influence, strategy, and connection. Whether in legal proceedings, business negotiations, or professional interactions, advocating effectively means understanding the audience, crafting compelling narratives, and anticipating objections before they arise. One of the most overlooked elements of advocacy? Emotional resonance. Facts matter, but how they’re framed makes all the difference. The strongest advocates don’t just present information—they shape perception, guide discussions, and leave a lasting impact. 🔹 Know your audience – Tailor your approach to what moves them. 🔹 Frame the narrative – A well-crafted story wins hearts and minds. 🔹 Anticipate resistance – Every strong argument is built for counterpoints. Whether you’re preparing a deposition or making a business pitch, advocacy is an art that blends logic with persuasion.