A Better Way to BLUF

By Jeffrey Pool 

In the federal government, staff are often instructed to state the main point at the very start of a document or presentation. This practice, known as the “bottom line up front” (or the BLUF), helps improve clarity and ease of reading. On its own, the BLUF can be a powerful statement–but will the intended audience learn enough from it to take informed action? 

When staff make concise, direct writing their top priority, they risk leaving out context that is essential to making informed decisions. Therefore, if they present a solid BLUF that appears to stand on its own to time-constrained senior leaders, it is understandable that the leaders will make decisions based on the BLUF alone. But what if leaders require more context to truly understand the effects or consequences of their decision? 

When presenting complex material or laying out multiple courses of action to key leaders, staff should provide some indication, however brief, of how they developed their recommendations and what outcomes they anticipate. These ideas should flow logically through to their conclusion. This also helps avoid misunderstandings when the remarks make their way to a broader audience than the staff originally intended. 

So, how can federal personnel and leaders benefit from the directness of the BLUF while minimizing the communication gaps of its front-loaded approach? By applying the following best practices: 

Understand the knowledge level of the audience.

Consider whether the audience comprises well-informed experts or are new to the topic. If they are novices, take some time to set a scene and explain any arcane concepts or jargon. 

Know the audience’s learning style.

Find out if the leader typically asks for a read-ahead and whether they use it. If the answer is yes to both, great—now you know that the meeting can dive right into the decision itself in the spirit of the BLUF. However, if the answer is no, the leader may be more of an oral or visual learner and will require a more detailed discussion to ensure they make an informed decision.  

Ensure that content answers three simple questions.

Matt Abrahams of Stanford University uses a model called, “What?–So what?–Now what?” Originally developed to prompt critical reflection in education and healthcare, this structure helps writers arrange their message in a way that prepares the reader or listener to understand what message the writer is transmitting, conveys why it is important, and tells them what to do with the information (usually in the form of a roadmap or recommendations). This approach also increases the likelihood that secondary audiences, those who will be implementing the decisions, clearly understand the whole concept. Now every reader (or listener) will have a summary statement, necessary scene setters, an explanation of why the issue warrants executive attention, and a roadmap or recommendation for the way forward.

Whether staff is writing to inform, to advise, or to influence, balancing the BLUF with the above three best practices will lead to clearer communication and more informed decision-making at all levels.