01 five subtypes

Five shapes. Five different questions.

Each diagram subtype frames a specific question. Process for sequence; framework for categorisation; hub-spoke for centrality; timeline for periodisation; value-chain for capture. Pick the question first; the shape follows almost automatically.

Process
10.8k 34%

how does it move forward?

sequence with optional branches. Steps numbered, arrows directional.
Framework
7.5k 23.6%

how do we think about this?

imported structure with cells. BCG, RACI, MECE, Cynefin, SWOT.
Hub-spoke
4.5k 14.2%

what connects to the centre?

one node, many peripherals. Ecosystem, root-of-relations.
Timeline
3.5k 11%

when did it happen?

time as a structural axis. Eras, phases, milestones.
Value-chain
1.2k 3.9%

where is the capture?

horizontal flow with margins per stage. Bottleneck = value.

§ 6.c.3 · diagram vs chart

Diagrams take the whole canvas. They do not share.

The median diagram is 60% wide × 49% tall — the largest visual atom in the corpus. When a diagram fits next to body text, it gave up half its argument.

60% × 49% median diagram dimensions vs 25% × 37% for images, 40% × 19% for text. Diagrams demand the room.

Diagram 60% × 49% argues with structure — connections, hierarchy, sequence. Quantity is incidental.
Chart 40% × 35% argues with numbers — magnitudes, distributions, change. Structure is incidental.
Hybrid < 5% rare and dangerous — chart with annotations OR diagram with sized nodes. Pick a side and commit.

03 borrowed without credit

Eight frameworks. One in twenty cites the source.

The corpus's most-borrowed structures arrive without attribution. BCG's matrix appears in 4% of slides that use it. MECE in 2%. The pattern: the more famous the framework, the less the corpus credits it. Assumed authority replaces stated authority — and the reader who does not recognise the structure is left to take it on faith.

Framework Shape Author Year Cited
BCG Growth-Share Matrix 2×2 Bruce Henderson · BCG 1968

4%
Porter's Five Forces pentagon Michael Porter · HBS 1979

6%
SWOT 2×2 Albert Humphrey · Stanford 1965

4%
RACI matrix grid Project mgmt · trad. 1970

3%
MECE tree Barbara Minto · McKinsey 1973

2%
Eisenhower Matrix 2×2 Eisenhower / Covey 1989

5%
Cynefin 5-domain Dave Snowden · IBM 1999

3%
Lean Canvas 9-block Ash Maurya 2009

10%

04 position

Diagrams take the whole canvas.

Across 32k diagrams and frameworks with measured bounding boxes, the structure is the slide. Median width is 60% — wider than any other family. Diagrams do not share.

modal diagram · 75×59%

left center right top middle bottom

05 slide-type cross

Diagrams live where the deck proposes.

Diagram presence concentrates in two slide-types: 'solution' (38%) and 'propose solution' (33%) — both the moments where the deck commits to an answer. Everywhere else, diagrams are rare. The structure is asked to do work where the answer is structural — not where the question is quantitative.

slide-type 18 most-frequent · n = 189,105

Solution 8,470

83%

63%

11%

38%

4%

6%

23%

Propose solution 5,667

87%

51%

14%

33%

6%

9%

53%

Market sizing 5,135

70%

24%

57%

14%

12%

33%

78%

Key messages 13,445

91%

50%

8%

13%

3%

8%

29%

Comparison table 5,456

52%

19%

33%

7%

59%

4%

66%

Traction 10,066

65%

36%

57%

6%

11%

28%

54%

Key takeaways 10,052

89%

34%

24%

6%

4%

17%

44%

Industry trends 8,214

78%

19%

68%

6%

7%

71%

Executive summary 6,818

90%

35%

12%

6%

10%

17%

45%

Expose contradiction 11,726

96%

24%

21%

4%

33%

1%

77%

Team bio 5,245

78%

91%

3%

2%

4%

5%

14%

KPI overview 26,367

59%

15%

64%

1%

30%

18%

76%

06 co-occurrence

Diagrams travel alone — and unsourced.

Diagram-bearing slides ship a single diagram 95% of the time (the structure dominates by design). They orbit lists (43%) and paragraphs (32%) — labels and explanations. But only 29% cite a source. A frame imported from outside without attribution is just a doodle with confidence.

01 Title always titled — the diagram needs naming
02 List labels around the diagram nodes
03 Paragraph explanation of what the structure means
04 Source-note — only 1 in 3. Imported frameworks (RACI, BCG, MECE) cited rarely.
05 Image diagram + image — usually the customer journey + persona photo
06 Callout diagram + callout = "look at THIS node"
07 Metric diagram + stat = "and the number is..."
08 Chart diagram + chart = boundary case (often a hybrid in disguise)

07 anti-patterns

Five diagram failures. All structural.

A bad chart shows the wrong number; a bad diagram shows the wrong structure. The cost is the same — a defensible argument made indefensible by its frame.

⊠

The non-MECE framework

Categories that overlap or leave gaps. Looks like a framework, fails as one.

common

Bad

"Customers · Partners · Stakeholders" — partners ARE customers, stakeholders include both.

Fix

Audit for mutual-exclusivity AND collective-exhaustiveness. If it fails either, redraw.
⤩

The arrow soup

Every box connected to every other box. The structure has no shape.

frequent

Bad

Process diagram with bidirectional arrows between all 6 nodes — looks like a network, reads like noise.

Fix

Pick a directionality. If it is truly a network, use a hub-spoke or a force-layout, not a process.
◇

The decorative structure

Boxes and arrows where bullets would have done. Structure pretending to argue.

~25%

Bad

"Goals → Strategy → Tactics" in three boxes connected by arrows. A list with a costume.

Fix

If the boxes carry no information beyond their order, write a numbered list. Save the diagram for non-linear structure.
◷

Borrowed without credit

A named framework (BCG, RACI, MECE, OKR) used without attribution.

71%

Bad

A 2×2 matrix with axes "growth" and "share" labelled simply "framework".

Fix

Cite the source. "BCG Growth-Share matrix · Boston Consulting Group, 1970".
◫

The 12-node diagram

Twelve+ nodes on a single canvas. The eye cannot trace.

~10%

Bad

Customer-journey diagram with 14 stages, 8 personas, and 6 channels — all on one slide.

Fix

Split into two diagrams. The first slide carries the spine, the second carries the detail.

08 safe zone

Four rules. Pick the structure first.

A diagram is a commitment to a frame. These four rules force the editorial work upfront — before the boxes get drawn.

01

Pick the question, then the shape

Process for sequence. Hub-spoke for centrality. Framework for categorisation. Timeline for periodisation. Pick the question; the shape follows.

5 shapes covering 80% of cases
02

If borrowed, cite

BCG, RACI, MECE, OKR, Cynefin, Lean Canvas — every named framework has an author and a year. Citing them imports their authority. Hiding them imports skepticism.

29% currently sourced
03

One diagram per slide

Diagrams take the whole canvas. Two diagrams compete for the same focal frame and dilute both. Split into two slides.

95% corpus already follows
04

No more than 7 nodes

Past 7 nodes the eye cannot trace a structure in one read. If the diagram needs more, split into a spine + a detail diagram.

7±2 cognitive limit

Find anything

Five shapes. Five different questions.

Diagrams take the whole canvas. They do not share.

Eight frameworks. One in twenty cites the source.

Diagrams take the whole canvas.

How to read this

Diagrams live where the deck proposes.

Diagrams travel alone — and unsourced.

Five diagram failures. All structural.

The non-MECE framework

The arrow soup

The decorative structure

Borrowed without credit

The 12-node diagram

Four rules. Pick the structure first.

Pick the question, then the shape

If borrowed, cite

One diagram per slide

No more than 7 nodes