Narrative Frameworks, Part 1

Transform fact-filled paragraphs into clear narratives. The ABT framework guides readers through your work by establishing context, introducing tension, and delivering resolution.

Your team just received a draft report synthesizing five years of program findings. It’s thorough. It’s detailed. And by the third paragraph, you’ve completely lost the thread. 

If you can’t follow it — and you live this work daily — your funders, board members, and community partners will instantly tune out.

This is the challenge facing mission-driven organizations everywhere: expertise can become a liability when every detail is deemed important. We end up with dense paragraphs packed with facts, leaving readers wondering: why does this matter?

Or worse, leaves readers not caring and turning their attention elsewhere.

This article is the first in a series exploring narrative frameworks that can help your organization tell its story more effectively. 

We’ll look at the And, But, Therefore (ABT) framework, which offers a practical solution to the barrage of facts often characterizing nonprofit writing. Developed by marine biologist-turned-storyteller Randy Olson, this simple structure helps transform technical writing into compelling narratives. Think of it as “context, conflict, consequences” — a pattern that guides readers through complex information while keeping them engaged.

The “and, and, and” trap

Listen to a five-year-old describe their school day: “We did math and then we had a snack and then we went outside and then we came back inside and then we did reading and then…”

Nonprofit technical writing often follows the same pattern. A paragraph about watershed restoration might read: “The project covers three counties, focused on stream bank stabilization, riparian buffer establishment, and water quality monitoring. We engage local communities through a citizen science program, including a youth education component and conservation curriculum to engage the next generation in watershed conservation.”

Each fact is true. Each detail matters to the people involved or affected. But strung together, they create a numbing list that gives readers no reason to keep reading. 

There’s no tension, no problem to solve, no “so what?”

How ABT creates narrative momentum

The ABT framework includes three components:

• And: Set up the context by describing the current situation, the ideal state, or key background details that readers need.
• But: Introduce tension by presenting a problem, barrier, gap, or challenge that needs addressing.
• Therefore: Create resolution through your solution, its consequences, or the next steps.

Here’s how this might look for a conservation organization:

“Healthy mangrove forests protect coastal communities from storms and provide nursery habitat for commercial fish species. These ecosystems deliver billions of dollars in storm protection and fishing income each year, but half of the world’s mangroves have been destroyed in the past 50 years, leaving millions of people vulnerable to flooding and lost livelihoods. Our restoration program combines community-led replanting with sustainable fishing zones that rebuild both ecosystems and local economies.”

And here’s an example for a workforce development organization:

“Job training programs aim to connect unemployed adults with stable careers in growing industries. Research shows that participants who complete technical training have significantly higher employment rates. However, nearly 40% of enrollees drop out before finishing, often citing lack of childcare, transportation barriers, or financial pressure to take immediate — but lower-paying — work. Our support model addresses these obstacles by providing stipends, childcare vouchers, and transportation assistance, helping 85% of participants complete training and secure jobs paying at least $45,000 annually.”

Notice the flow in both examples: you understand the value, you see the problem, and you learn what’s being done about it.

Applying ABT to your writing

And: Set the stage with the essential context

The “and” section sets the stage, but it shouldn’t dominate your writing. This part likely comes naturally — in fact, many technical writers get stuck here. The key is knowing when to move on.

Think of the context as providing just enough information for readers to understand why the conflict matters. You might introduce an ideal or goal state, describe how things are now or used to be, or introduce key actors or circumstances. Keep it minimal — when applying ABT to a paragraph, aim for just one or two sentences of context.

Ask yourself: What are the critical details? What can be filled in later if needed?

Before: “Small-scale farmers in Southeast Asia cultivate rice, vegetables, and fruit crops on plots averaging 1.5 hectares. The region has experienced significant agricultural development over the past three decades. These farmers typically use traditional farming methods passed down through generations, though some have adopted hybrid seeds. Regional rainfall patterns vary considerably, with monsoon seasons providing the majority of annual precipitation.”

After: “Small-scale farmers in Southeast Asia produce one-third of the region’s food supply, relying on traditional farming methods developed over generations.”

Save comprehensive background for later sections. Lead with what matters to your audience.

But: Make the conflict specific and real

If there’s no conflict — no problem or goal that interests your reader — there’s little incentive to keep reading. The conflict doesn’t require drama. It can be subtle: an unexpected change, a barrier, a setback, a data gap, an opportunity not yet achieved, or some other difficulty.

You don’t need to use the word “but” every time you introduce conflict. Try varying your approach while maintaining the narrative structure.

Here are examples of different types of conflict, building from the previous example:

“Small-scale farmers in Southeast Asia produce one-third of the region’s food supply, relying on traditional farming methods developed over generations….

Data gap: “These farmers earn less than $2 per day, but we have little data on which climate adaptation strategies actually improve their long-term resilience.”

Unexpected finding: “Initial surveys suggested farmers needed better seeds and fertilizers, but field research revealed that lack of access to weather information was their primary constraint.”

Unmet opportunity: “These farmers have deep knowledge of traditional growing practices, yet climate change is making their traditional growing seasons increasingly unpredictable.”

Barrier or setback: “Many want to adopt climate-resilient practices, but they can’t afford the upfront costs of new seeds, equipment, or training.”

The conflict should make readers think: “Okay, so what are you doing about it?”

Therefore: End with meaningful resolution

Each paragraph, section, or document should resolve its conflict in some way, however subtly. You want to give readers a reason to either keep reading or take action.

The resolution might offer a summary of next steps, describe a desired outcome, present a takeaway message, provide a clear call to action, or at minimum create a strong transition to the next section.

Building from the climate adaptation data gap example above:

Solution-focused: “Our new monitoring system tracks which adaptation strategies farmers adopt and measures changes in yields, income, and food security over three growing seasons — generating the evidence base that funders and policymakers need.”

Outcome-focused: “This evidence has already influenced national agricultural policy in two countries and attracted $2.3 million in new funding for farmer-led adaptation programs.”

Next steps: “We’re now partnering with agricultural extension services in four countries to scale this monitoring approach and build a regional database of effective climate adaptation strategies.”

Call to action: “Help us expand this research to ten more countries by supporting our Climate Resilience Fund.”

Notice how each provides concrete information rather than vague promises.

ABT at different scales

The framework works at multiple levels:

Paragraph level: This is the most common application, using ABT to structure individual paragraphs, especially when introducing new concepts or data.

Section or chapter level: Apply it to major sections of reports or proposals, where each section introduces a different aspect of your work on a particular issue, and how your work addresses that issue.

Document level: This is the traditional three-act play. Your executive summary, project description, or case study can follow the overall pattern — establishing context, identifying the problem, and presenting your approach. 

From framework to habit

You don’t need to write “and, but, therefore” explicitly. In fact, you shouldn’t, as the words themselves can feel mechanical. Instead, internalize the pattern: context, conflict, resolution.

When editing technical writing from your team, look for the “and, and, and” trap — long paragraphs filled with lists and details but no narrative rise and fall. Ask the questions: Where’s the conflict? What problem are we solving? Why should the reader care? When working with colleagues who produce technical content, help them identify the tension in their findings. What surprised them? What’s still unknown? What barrier did they overcome? That’s your “but”: the hook that transforms information into story.

The ABT framework won’t solve every communications challenge. But it will help you find a compelling narrative thread in even the most technical material. When your readers can follow that thread from context through conflict to resolution, they’re far more likely to understand — and support — your mission.