EC-301c · Module 2

Bullets That Work

3 min read

Bullets in an executive one-pager are not lists. They are evidence. Each bullet is a discrete, auditable fact that supports the recommendation. A bullet that is an observation, a process step, or a vague claim is not functioning as evidence — it is taking up one of three available slots and returning nothing.

The three-bullet rule is absolute. Three bullets maximum. If you have five pieces of evidence, pick the three strongest. A fourth bullet dilutes the first three. An executive who reads four bullets remembers fewer than an executive who reads three. The discipline of selecting three forces you to rank your evidence and lead with the best.

Each bullet gets one sentence. The bullet that requires two sentences is either two separate facts that deserve two separate bullets, or a single fact with a qualification that should be cut. If you cannot state the evidence in one sentence without losing the essential fact, the evidence needs to be reformulated — not expanded.

Bullet structure: specificity first. Not "improved processing efficiency" — "38% reduction in processing time in 90-day pilot." Not "cost savings expected" — "projected $2.1M annual cost reduction at full deployment." Not "strong industry precedent" — "comparable organizations report 25–40% cost reduction, per published case studies."

Do This

  • "38% processing time reduction in 90-day pilot (1,200 claims, 4 claim types)"
  • "Projected $2.1M annual cost reduction at full deployment — base case at 75% benefit realization"
  • "Industry benchmark: comparable organizations achieve 25–40% cost reduction within 18 months of deployment"

Avoid This

  • "Significant improvements in processing efficiency were observed during the pilot period"
  • "The AI system has demonstrated the ability to handle a wide range of claim types with improved accuracy and speed"
  • "There is strong evidence from industry that AI automation produces meaningful cost reductions"