01 / START HERE
A useful way to approach it.
A synthesis explains what several sources mean together. It is more than one paragraph summarizing each document. Start with a question, place relevant findings beside each other, and examine where they agree or describe different conditions. The reader should be able to follow the evidence from a specific source to a cautious conclusion.
Use o1 to organize material you supply, or retrieve additional sources when signed-in web search is enabled. Keep the original source register and label any inference. A synthesis can help you decide what to do next without pretending that every disagreement has been resolved. The worked example uses authored fictional notes, not a live analysis of real reports.
02 / THE PROCESS
Go from question to next step.
- 01
Define the memo's decision
Write the question your reader needs answered and the action it might change. Limit the memo to that job. If the material covers several unrelated decisions, split the questions before summarizing. Choose a small number of comparison dimensions that let you examine the evidence consistently across sources.
- 02
Extract findings into an evidence matrix
For each relevant passage record source ID, finding, date, population or product scope, and any stated limitation. Preserve the distinction between reported observation and the author's interpretation. Do not strip the context to make entries shorter. An assistant can draft the matrix, but you should check the entries against the passages.
- 03
Map agreement and disagreement
Group entries that address the same question. Look for differences in definitions, geography, methods, time periods, or use cases before calling the reports contradictory. When evidence genuinely conflicts, state what each source establishes and what remains uncertain. Avoid averaging unrelated numbers simply because they appear under similar headings.
- 04
Draft a bounded conclusion
Explain the strongest supported finding first, followed by important qualifications and gaps. Use language that matches the evidence: a source may suggest a possibility without proving a general effect. Put your recommendation in a separate section and explain which priorities or assumptions connect it to the findings.
- 05
Check the chain of reasoning
Open each source supporting a consequential sentence. Confirm that the memo preserves its conditions and that recommendations do not rely on an omitted contrary finding. Ask what evidence would change your recommendation. Finish with a next research or validation step rather than a confident closing statement that hides the remaining uncertainty.
03 / YOUR STARTING POINT
A prompt you can make your own.
Replace the bracketed fields. Add only information you have permission to share. This is a reusable text prompt; it does not run a task from this page.
Synthesize these source notes and excerpts: {{material}} to answer {{decision_question}} for {{audience}}. Create an evidence matrix with source ID, finding, date, scope, and limitation. Group agreement and disagreement by question, checking whether definitions or periods differ. Draft a short memo with supported findings, labeled interpretation, recommendation, and unresolved questions. Keep source pointers beside claims. Do not combine incompatible figures or invent consensus. End with the evidence that would change the recommendation and the next check to perform.04 / SEE THE SHAPE OF IT
Illustrative synthesis of workshop scheduling notes
Fictional source notes authored for this worked example; no interviews, surveys, or live research were conducted.
| Authored evidence | Scope | Synthesis implication |
|---|---|---|
| S1: participants request evening sessions | Notes from a fictional weekday group | Explore an evening option |
| S2: room available only before 6 p.m. | Fictional venue terms | That room cannot meet the proposed schedule |
| S3: some participants prefer weekends | Separate fictional group | A second segment may need a different test |
| Conclusion | Availability and preference both matter | Compare another venue before promising dates |
The useful conclusion follows from the intersection of preferences and constraints. It preserves the different groups instead of claiming universal agreement.
05 / KEEP YOUR JUDGMENT
What to watch before you use it.
Summarizing without connecting
One summary per document leaves the reader to do the synthesis. Organize findings around the shared question and explain their relationship.
Hiding conflicting evidence
A clean story can be less accurate than a qualified one. Retain a contrary finding when it could change the decision.
Turning an assumption into a finding
State the assumption linking evidence to your recommendation. Do not let the memo's confident prose make that connection look measured.
06 / THE FINAL PASS
A little review goes a long way.
Your checks stay on this page. They do not approve or run a task.
07 / GOOD QUESTIONS
Before you begin.
How is synthesis different from summarizing?
A summary condenses a source. A synthesis compares relevant findings across sources to answer a question, explaining agreement, disagreement, and conditions. You may need summaries first, but the final memo should make those relationships explicit.
What if the evidence does not support a decision?
Say what can be established and identify the specific gap. The useful output may be a narrower question or a validation plan. Do not force a recommendation when its essential assumption has no adequate support.
Can I combine quantitative and qualitative evidence?
Yes, while preserving what each can establish. A count may describe a defined population; a comment may explain one reported experience. Explain their complementary roles rather than treating an anecdote as proof of a general rate.