# Methodology disclosure templates Templates for assumption lists, methodology pages, source citations, formula explanations. Patterns for disclosing calculation logic in ways the audience can use to defend the result. A methodology disclosure is not a marketing document. It is a technical document that lets the audience interrogate the calculator. The templates here cover the patterns that hold up to interrogation. --- ## Methodology page template A standalone page that explains the calculator's calculations in detail. **Structure.** ``` # How the [calculator name] is calculated ## What this calculator does [2-3 sentences describing the calculation in plain language] ## The formulas [Plain-text formulas with each variable defined] ## Assumptions [Plain-language list of what the calculator assumes] ## Sources [Citations for any external benchmarks or data] ## Worked example [A specific scenario with input values and resulting calculation] ## Caveats [What the calculator does not account for; when to seek additional analysis] ## Updates [Date of last methodology review; how often the calculator is updated] ``` --- ## Assumption list template A plain-language list of assumptions, formatted for scan-ability. **Structure.** ``` ## What this calculator assumes - [Assumption 1: stated plainly] - [Assumption 2: stated plainly] - [Assumption 3: stated plainly] ## What this calculator does NOT account for - [Excluded factor 1] - [Excluded factor 2] If your situation differs significantly from these assumptions, the result is an estimate; consider [additional resource] for more precise analysis. ``` **Example assumption list for a SaaS pricing calculator.** ``` ## What this calculator assumes - Your team will use the platform daily across business hours. - Implementation takes 4-6 weeks for teams in the 50-200 employee range. - The recommended plan is based on typical usage patterns from our customer base. - Productivity gains compound through year 1 and stabilize in year 2. ## What this calculator does NOT account for - Custom integrations or enterprise SSO requirements. - Volume discounts available for annual contracts above $50K. - Migration cost from your current platform. If your situation involves enterprise SSO, custom integrations, or migration costs, talk to our team for a tailored estimate. ``` --- ## Source citation template How to cite external benchmarks or data. **Inline citation pattern.** ``` Industry Average: 14 percent (Source: [Industry Benchmark Report 2025], page 23) ``` **Footnote pattern.** ``` Industry Average: 14 percent [^1] [^1]: Industry Benchmark Report 2025. Available at [URL]. Accessed [Date]. ``` **Multi-source pattern.** ``` The conversion-rate benchmark we use combines: - Industry Benchmark Report 2025 (Source A) - Our customer cohort data (n=200, 2024-2025) - Public conversion-rate studies from [Source C] The composite benchmark is 14 percent. ``` **Internal-source pattern.** ``` Source: [Brand]'s customer cohort data, n=200, 2024-2025. The cohort represents customers in the 50-500 employee range across SaaS, e-commerce, and B2B services. ``` --- ## Formula explanation template How to display formulas in ways the audience can verify. **Plain-text formula pattern.** ``` Annual savings = (current annual cost) - (estimated new annual cost) + first-year implementation savings Where: current annual cost = current monthly cost x 12 estimated new annual cost = recommended plan price x 12 first-year implementation savings = $500 if migrating from a manual process, otherwise $0 ``` **Step-by-step calculation pattern.** ``` 1. Calculate current annual cost: $3,000 / month x 12 = $36,000 2. Calculate estimated new annual cost: $2,000 / month x 12 = $24,000 3. Calculate cost reduction: $36,000 - $24,000 = $12,000 4. Add first-year implementation savings: $12,000 + $2,200 = $14,200 Annual savings: $14,200 ``` **Conditional logic pattern.** ``` The recommended plan is determined by: If team size is 1-10: Starter plan ($X / month) If team size is 11-50: Growth plan ($Y / month) If team size is 51-200: Business plan ($Z / month) If team size is 201+: Enterprise (contact for pricing) Plan recommendations may shift based on use case (e.g., teams with heavy data needs may benefit from a higher tier even at a lower seat count). ``` --- ## Worked-example template A concrete scenario the audience can read end-to-end. **Structure.** ``` ## Worked example: [scenario description] Inputs: - [Input 1]: [value] - [Input 2]: [value] - [Input 3]: [value] Calculation: [Step-by-step formula application] Result: [Final output with units] Interpretation: [1-2 sentences explaining what the result means and how the audience would use it] ``` **Example for a SaaS pricing calculator.** ``` ## Worked example: 75-person B2B SaaS team Inputs: - Team size: 75 - Use case: Customer support - Current solution: Manual spreadsheets Calculation: - Recommended plan: Business ($45 / user / month) - Monthly cost: 75 users x $45 = $3,375 - Annual cost: $3,375 x 12 = $40,500 - Estimated time savings: 8 hours / week / agent x 75 agents x $40 / hour x 50 weeks = $1.2M - Net annual value: $1.2M - $40,500 = $1.16M Result: - Recommended plan: Business - Monthly investment: $3,375 - Estimated annual time-savings value: $1.2M - Net annual value: $1.16M Interpretation: A 75-person customer-support team migrating from manual spreadsheets to the Business plan would invest $40,500 annually and save approximately $1.16M in time-equivalent value. The largest contributor is hours saved per agent per week. ``` --- ## Caveats template What the calculator does not do, stated honestly. **Structure.** ``` ## What this calculator does not account for - [Excluded factor 1]: why it is excluded and what to do if it matters - [Excluded factor 2]: why it is excluded and what to do if it matters For situations involving [specific complex case], the calculator's estimate may not apply; consider [additional resource or contact] for more precise analysis. ``` **Why caveats matter.** Caveats signal the calculator's honesty. The audience that knows the caveats can use the result with appropriate confidence; the audience that does not know the caveats may apply the result to a situation it does not fit. **Common caveats to include.** - The calculator does not account for taxes, regulations, or jurisdiction-specific factors. - The calculator does not account for one-time setup or migration costs. - The calculator's benchmarks reflect the typical case; outliers may differ significantly. - The calculator's projections are estimates, not guarantees. --- ## Update-history template How to track methodology changes over time. **Structure.** ``` ## Updates This calculator's methodology was last reviewed on [date]. Recent updates: - [Date]: Updated industry-benchmark source from [old] to [new]. - [Date]: Adjusted productivity-gains assumption based on cohort data through [year]. - [Date]: Added consideration for [new factor]. Major version history: - v1.0 ([date]): Initial release. - v1.1 ([date]): Added [feature]. - v2.0 ([date]): Refactored methodology to include [new dimension]. ``` **Why update history matters.** Audiences who relied on previous outputs can see what changed. The transparency about updates signals that the calculator is maintained, not abandoned. --- ## Methodology integration patterns How to integrate the methodology disclosure into the calculator UI. **Pattern A: Inline disclosure.** The methodology appears alongside the result. Best for short calculations where the formula is digestible. **Pattern B: Expandable section.** "How this is calculated" expandable below the result. The user opens it if they want depth. **Pattern C: Linked methodology page.** A "How this is calculated" link to a separate page. Best for complex calculations. **Pattern D: Hover-revealed detail.** Each result component has a tooltip explaining how it was derived. Useful for multi-component results. **Pattern E: Methodology-in-PDF.** The free result shows the headline; the gated PDF contains full methodology. Works when the PDF is genuine value-add. --- ## Audience-specific methodology depth Calibrate methodology depth to the audience's analytical sophistication. **Highly analytical audiences (engineers, finance, data scientists).** Detailed formulas, source citations, version history. The audience expects depth and rewards transparency. **Moderately analytical audiences (PMs, marketers, operations).** Plain-language formulas, key assumptions, summary citations. The audience wants to verify but does not need every variable. **Less analytical audiences (executives, generalists).** Plain-language summary of the methodology, key assumptions, "talk to us if you want depth" option. The audience trusts based on the summary; depth is available if needed. The discipline. Match the methodology depth to the audience that uses the calculator. Too thin loses analytical audiences; too dense loses generalist audiences. --- ## Common methodology disclosure failures **No methodology shown.** Result without explanation; audience cannot verify or defend. **Methodology hidden behind email.** Lead-trap pattern applied to methodology; audience that wants to verify must opt in first. **Methodology in marketing language.** "Our proprietary algorithm draws on industry-leading data" is not methodology; it is brand copy. **Methodology that hides the assumptions.** Formulas shown; assumptions not stated; audience cannot tell what the calculator assumes about their situation. **Methodology that hides the sources.** Industry averages cited without attribution. **Methodology that does not match the calculation.** Stated methodology and actual implementation drift apart over time. **Methodology with no update history.** Calculator changes silently; audience that relied on previous outputs cannot see what changed. --- ## Methodology-level choices that stay in the public skill The methodology page template. The assumption list template. The source citation patterns. Formula explanation patterns. Worked-example template. Caveats template. Update-history template. Methodology integration patterns. Audience-specific methodology depth. Common disclosure failures. ## Implementation choices that stay internal Specific methodology pages for specific calculators. Specific source-citation conventions and benchmark relationships. Specific formula-display tooling and styling. Specific worked-example libraries. The team's methodology update calendars and version control. These vary by team.