Speech Architecture

Speech Architecture

Structure any presentation, argument, or extended persuasive communication using classical arrangement patterns for maximum impact.

When to Use

• User says "How should I organize this?" or "What's the best structure?"
• Preparing any extended argument or presentation
• Content is good but "disorganized" or "all over the place"
• Need to transform bullet points into flowing narrative
• Restructuring existing content that isn't landing

Inputs

The Classical Six-Part Structure

1. Exordium (Introduction)

Purpose: Capture attention, establish goodwill, preview the journey

Techniques:

• Start with a surprising fact
• Open with a relevant story
• Ask a provocative question
• Invoke shared experience
• Quote an authority
• State the problem dramatically

Establish your thesis or goal: By the end of the exordium, the audience should know (at least roughly) where you're taking them.

Common mistakes:

• Starting with "Today I'm going to talk about..." (boring)
• Excessive throat-clearing or apologies
• Not connecting to audience interests immediately

2. Narratio (Background/Context)

Purpose: Provide the story or context that frames everything else

Techniques:

• Tell the history of the problem
• Describe the current situation
• Build common ground with audience
• Establish shared facts before contested claims

Key principle: Narrate; don't argue. This section builds the frame; the arguments come later.

Common mistakes:

• Dumping all information here (save proof for Confirmatio)
• Making this too long (lose momentum)
• Assuming audience knows context they don't

3. Partitio (Division/Outline)

Purpose: Preview the structure so audience can follow

Techniques:

• "I'll cover three areas..."
• "First... then... finally..."
• Create mental scaffolding
• Signal what's coming

This can be brief: Sometimes a single sentence: "Let me walk you through the problem, the options, and my recommendation."

Common mistakes:

• Skipping this (audience gets lost)
• Making it too detailed (boring; loses surprise)

4. Confirmatio (Proof)

Purpose: Present your arguments and evidence

Ordering strategies:

• Strongest first - If audience is hostile or skeptical
• Strongest last - If audience is neutral (end on high note)
• Nestorian order - Strong, then weak, then strongest (classic)
• Chronological - For historical or process arguments
• Problem-solution - For proposals

For each point:

1. State the claim
2. Provide evidence (data, example, authority)
3. Explain why it matters (so what?)
4. Transition to next point

Common mistakes:

• Presenting arguments without evidence
• Not explaining significance ("so what?")
• Equal time for unequal points (weight them)

5. Refutatio (Refutation)

Purpose: Address counterarguments and objections

Strategies:

• Inoculation - Address objections before opponent/audience raises them
• Direct refutation - "Some argue X, but..."
• Concession and pivot - "While it's true that X, this is outweighed by..."
• Reframing - "That's not the right question. The real question is..."

Position options:

• Before Confirmatio (clear the field first)
• After Confirmatio (standard position)
• Woven throughout (address objections as they naturally arise)

Common mistakes:

• Ignoring obvious objections (audience notices)
• Strawmanning opponents (lose credibility)
• Dwelling too long on opponent's case

6. Peroratio (Conclusion)

Purpose: Summarize, move emotionally, call to action

Three-part classical structure:

1. Recapitulation - Brief summary of main points
2. Emotional appeal - Pathos climax; make them feel
3. Call to action - Specific next step; what should they do?

Techniques:

• Return to opening image/story (circular closure)
• Paint the vision of success
• Invoke values and stakes
• Make the ask explicit

Common mistakes:

• Adding new arguments (should be concluding, not extending)
• Trailing off ("So... yeah... that's it")
• No clear call to action (audience doesn't know what to do)

Alternative Structures

Monroe's Motivated Sequence (for action-oriented speeches)

1. Attention - Hook the audience
2. Need - Establish the problem
3. Satisfaction - Present your solution
4. Visualization - Show the future with/without solution
5. Action - Call for specific action

Problem-Solution-Benefit (for proposals)

1. Problem - What's wrong?
2. Solution - What you propose
3. Benefits - Why it's worth it
4. Implementation - How it works
5. Call to action

STAR (for case studies and examples)

1. Situation - Context
2. Task - Challenge faced
3. Action - What was done
4. Result - Outcome achieved

Workflow

Step 1: Gather and Review Inputs

Collect all relevant information:

• Review the provided data and context
• Identify key parameters and constraints
• Clarify any ambiguities or missing information
• Establish success criteria

Step 2: Analyze the Situation

Perform systematic analysis:

• Identify patterns and relationships
• Evaluate against established frameworks
• Consider multiple perspectives
• Document key findings

Step 3: Generate Recommendations

Create actionable outputs:

• Synthesize insights from analysis
• Prioritize recommendations by impact
• Ensure recommendations are specific and measurable
• Consider implementation feasibility

Output Format

## Speech Architecture: [Topic]

### Recommended Structure

**I. Exordium (Introduction)** - [Time/length suggestion]
[Opening hook suggestion]
[Thesis/preview statement]

**II. Narratio (Background)** - [Time/length]
[Context to establish]
[Story or framing]

**III. Partitio (Outline)** - [Brief]
[How to preview the structure]

**IV. Confirmatio (Proof)** - [Main body time]
- Point 1: [Claim + evidence + significance]
- Point 2: [Claim + evidence + significance]
- Point 3: [Claim + evidence + significance]

**V. Refutatio (Objections)** - [Time]
[Key objection(s) to address]
[Recommended approach]

**VI. Peroratio (Conclusion)** - [Time]
[Summary approach]
[Emotional appeal]
[Specific call to action]

### Transitions
[Suggested transition language between sections]

### Alternative Structure Considered
[If another structure might work better, note it and why]

Constraints

• Recommend ONE primary structure, even if alternatives are mentioned
• Provide specific language for transitions and openings
• Time/length suggestions should be proportional (e.g., 10% intro, 60% body, 10% objections, 20% conclusion for persuasive speech)
• Note when to deviate from classical structure and why
• Consider audience hostility level in structure recommendations

Outputs

Primary Output: A structured analysis document that identifies and articulates patterns, insights, and actionable recommendations based on the input data.

Format:

## Analysis: [Topic]

### Key Findings
- [Finding 1]
- [Finding 2]
- [Finding 3]

### Recommendations
1. [Action 1]
2. [Action 2]
3. [Action 3]

Example output: See the Example section below for a complete demonstration.

Example

Input: "I have a 15-minute slot to pitch our startup to investors. I have information about the problem, our solution, the team, traction, and our ask."

Output:

Why this works:

This example demonstrates the key principles of the skill in action. The approach is effective because:

• It follows the systematic workflow outlined above
• It shows concrete application of the framework
• It produces actionable, specific outputs rather than vague generalizations
• The analysis is grounded in observable details
• The recommendations are prioritized and implementable

Alternative applications:

This same approach can be applied to:

• Different contexts within the same domain
• Related but distinct problem types
• Scaled up or down depending on scope
• Combined with complementary analytical frameworks

Speech Architecture: Investor Pitch

Recommended Structure

I. Exordium (1 min) Open with the problem, made vivid: "Last week, a hospital in Texas lost a patient because they couldn't find the right specialist in time. This happens 40 times a day in the US."

Thesis: "We've built the solution, and we're here to ask you to help us scale it."

II. Narratio (2 min) Brief market context:

• Size of healthcare coordination problem
• Why existing solutions fail
• The moment of insight that led to founding

III. Partitio (30 sec) "I'll show you the product, share our traction, introduce the team, and tell you exactly what we need."

IV. Confirmatio (8 min)

• Product (2 min): Demo or clear explanation. Show, don't tell.
• Traction (2 min): Numbers that matter. Growth rate, retention, revenue.
• Team (2 min): Why you can execute. Relevant experience. Key hires.
• Business model (2 min): How you make money. Unit economics if favorable.

V. Refutatio (1.5 min) Address the obvious objection: "You might wonder why the incumbents won't just copy this." Answer directly and confidently.

VI. Peroratio (2 min)

• Summary: "We've found product-market fit in a massive market with a team that can execute."
• Vision: "In five years, no patient will die waiting for a specialist connection."
• The Ask: "We're raising $5M. We've got $3M committed. We'd love to show you a demo and talk terms."

Transitions

• Problem to solution: "That's the problem. Here's what we built."
• Traction to team: "These numbers are because of who's building this."
• Before the ask: "Let me tell you exactly what we need."

Note

The classical order works well here, but Traction before Product is an alternative if your numbers are your strongest asset. Lead with your best card.

Integration

This skill is part of the Cicero expert persona and elaborates the Dispositio canon from the Five Canons Analysis. Use Speech Architecture when structure is the primary need; use Five Canons Analysis for comprehensive preparation.