I struggle with finding the balance between being too high-level and too detailed. If I keep things concise, leaders ask for more breakdowns. If I add breakdowns, they say it’s too much information.
How do you define the ‘minimum viable insight’ for executive reporting so the report stays useful without becoming a 20-page dump?
Avatar The right level of detail for an exec report is just enough information for a leader to understand what changed, why it matters, and what decision they need to make next nothing more. Executives don’t want the full diagnostic trail; they want the implication. If a detail doesn’t change the decision, the priority, or the risk perception, it doesn’t belong in the main report.
Think of it like a funnel: the top is a clear headline insight, the middle is a short explanation of the driver, and the bottom is the recommended action. Everything else breakdowns, tables, deeper analysis stays in an appendix or is shared only if someone asks. Leaders should feel informed, not overloaded, and confident that you have the depth without forcing them to read it upfront.
