Argumentation-Triangle – Efficiency

Smart Structuring Methode Argumentation-Triangle
Categorie Efficiency
Short overview The argumentation triangle assigns the basic value position of a company, product or project and the supporting arguments to each other. 3-5 arguments should serve as a sufficient foundation. The created triangle is the guideline for all further communication elements, whether sales story, PR, digital or print-based dialogue.
Developed by Uwe Greunke
Online Reference /
Book /
Insights

The methodology should include the following five steps of structuring:

  1. Position (long-term)
    It is best to first work out the central position. What is the mission, the differentiating value creation for the company, product or project? An inside-out view often plays a role here. The conviction that one’s own company, project or product has a unique position. Therefore, the following two steps are important to prove this from the perspective of the outsider.
  2. Arguments (medium term)
    At this supporting level, 3-5 arguments are necessary as the foundation of the positioning. The best perspective is always that of the potential user. The pains/gains of the respective business environment are also very well suited. What drives the potential user? Where do they see dangers, where opportunities?
  3. Evidence (short-term)
    Below the level of argumentation, the evidence must now be supplemented. These are cases, technical explanations, user quotes, references, etc. Coming from position (1), supported by an argument (2), the equivalent in a proof is found here. Each argument should have at least one proof, so that a conclusive overall history is created.
  4. Cleaning up (steady)
    The challenge lies above all in omitting the other arguments in sales and marketing. Better 3-5 arguments plus proofs, which can be reliably called up in the team, than ad hoc constructions. Less is more.
  5. Review (annually)
    At least check the proof level annually. Whether this applies to the proof level depends on the context. Better check here as well.
Best usage for… simple structuring of even extensive projects. Ideal as a coordination instrument with various stakeholders. Laying a very important foundation.
Weak result when… supporting arguments are too weak. Then only an arbitrary shell or positioning remains. Conversely, however, it is precisely here that weak companies, products or projects can be identified. Beware of too many arguments. If you want to explain many things to many target groups under one position, you can hardly create differentiation.
Template Can be easily created in a text program.
Needed time span Preparation time from 1 hour depending on the project.
Type of presentation Simple documentation in presentation applications or argumentation paper, whiteboard, moderation board or flipchart
Size of group 1-n

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *