What You’ll Learn
- WAT Is Argumentation, Not Article Writing
- The Verb Test: How to Write Logical Arguments in WAT
- How to Write WAT Body: The PEEL Framework
- Evidence That Convinces: How to Write WAT Essay That Scores
- Counter-Arguments: Balance vs Fence-Sitting
- How to Write WAT in 15 Minutes
- How to Write WAT in 20 Minutes
- How to Write WAT for IIM: School-Specific Strategies
- Can We Write in Bullet Points in WAT?
- Argument Mistakes That Kill Your Score
Here’s what most candidates get wrong about how to write arguments in WAT: they treat it like school essay writing. They string together opinions, add some quotes, and hope eloquence wins marks.
It doesn’t.
WAT isn’t testing your writing ability. It’s testing your argumentation—your capacity to build a logical case, support it with evidence, acknowledge complexity, and arrive at a defensible conclusion. This is exactly what future managers do in boardrooms, and IIM evaluators know it.
This guide shows you exactly how to write WAT arguments that evaluators respect—whether you have 15 minutes at IIM-L or 20 minutes at IIM-B. You’ll learn the frameworks, see examples, and understand why structure + evidence beats eloquence every time.
WAT Is Argumentation, Not Article Writing
The fundamental shift you need to make: stop thinking like a writer, start thinking like a lawyer.
Writers create prose. Lawyers build cases. In WAT, you’re building a case—taking a position, marshaling evidence, anticipating objections, and driving toward a verdict. Every sentence should serve your thesis, not just fill space.
The Anatomy of an Argument
Every argument has three components. Miss any one, and you don’t have an argument—you have an opinion:
| Component | What It Is | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Claim | Your position/thesis | “Remote work improves productivity for knowledge workers.” |
| Evidence | Facts, data, examples supporting claim | “TCS reported 21% higher productivity from remote teams in 2023.” |
| Reasoning | Logic connecting evidence to claim | “Without commute stress and office interruptions, focused work increases.” |
Great lawyers don’t dump evidence—they weave narratives. Your WAT should tell a story, not list points. Every trial has one theme; your essay should have one clear thesis. Juries remember the first and last things they hear—so open and close with your strongest material. Limit yourself to 3 main arguments maximum—more dilutes impact.
The Verb Test: How to Write Logical Arguments in WAT
Want to know the single most powerful technique for how to write logical arguments in WAT? It’s called the Verb Test.
Here’s the rule: If there’s no verb, there’s no action. No action means vague nonsense.
- “India needs better education.”
- “The economy requires reform.”
- “There should be more sustainability.”
- “We need technological advancement.”
- “Schools must integrate vocational training by Class 10.”
- “RBI should reduce repo rates by 50 basis points.”
- “Companies must report carbon emissions quarterly.”
- “Government should fund 10 AI research centers by 2026.”
Notice the difference? The right column has action verbs—must integrate, should reduce, must report, should fund. These are specific, actionable, and arguable. The left column is what 80% of candidates write—vague statements that say nothing.
Applying the Verb Test to Your Arguments
Before you write any argument, ask yourself three questions:
“State governments should allocate 5% of education budgets to digital infrastructure within 2 years.”
Topic: “Should India focus on manufacturing or services?”
Vague argument: “India needs a balanced approach to both sectors.”
Verb-tested argument: “India must prioritize services for immediate growth while investing ₹2 lakh crore in PLI schemes to build manufacturing capacity over the next decade. State governments should identify regional comparative advantages and specialize accordingly—Tamil Nadu focusing on automotive, Karnataka on aerospace.”
How to Write WAT Body: The PEEL Framework
The biggest challenge in understanding how to write WAT body is structuring individual paragraphs. Each body paragraph should be a mini-argument with its own internal logic. Enter the PEEL framework—your paragraph-level architecture.
PEEL in Practice: A Complete Body Paragraph
Topic: “Is remote work sustainable long-term?”
[P – POINT] Remote work demonstrably improves productivity for knowledge workers when implemented with proper infrastructure.
Clear claim with qualifier (“when implemented properly”) showing nuance[E – EVIDENCE] A Stanford study of 16,000 workers found a 13% productivity increase among remote employees, while TCS reported 21% higher output from its hybrid workforce in 2023.
Named source + specific numbers = credibility. Two examples strengthen the point.[E – EXPLAIN] This productivity gain stems from eliminated commute time, reduced office interruptions, and the ability to work during personal peak hours—factors that particularly benefit roles requiring deep focus.
Reasoning explains WHY the evidence supports the point—not just what, but why.[L – LINK] Given these documented benefits, the sustainability question isn’t whether remote work can be productive, but whether organizations will invest in the infrastructure to maintain it.
Connects back to thesis and sets up the next argument seamlessly.Trial lawyers use a maximum of 3 main arguments—more dilutes impact. In a 20-minute WAT, limit yourself to 1-2 strong PEEL paragraphs plus a counter-argument, rather than 3-4 weak ones. Depth beats breadth. One specific example beats three generic ones. An evaluator who reads 400 essays in 3-4 hours will remember the essay with one powerful point, not the one with five forgettable ones.
Evidence That Convinces: How to Write WAT Essay That Scores
Knowing how to write WAT essay that actually scores means understanding what counts as evidence—and what doesn’t. Evaluators see hundreds of essays with vague claims. Yours needs proof.
The Evidence Hierarchy
| Evidence Type | Strength | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Statistics with Source | Highest | “UPI processed 10 billion transactions in December 2024 (NPCI data)” |
| Named Company/Person Example | High | “When Patagonia’s founder donated his $3 billion company to fight climate change…” |
| Historical/Policy Reference | Medium-High | “India’s 1991 liberalization led to 7%+ average growth for two decades” |
| Logical Reasoning | Medium | “If companies must pay for carbon emissions, they’ll innovate to reduce them” |
| General Statement | Lowest | “Many people believe that technology has changed society” |
Building Your Evidence Bank
Top scorers don’t invent evidence in the exam room—they draw from a prepared mental bank. Here are high-value statistics to memorize for different topic categories:
- India’s GDP: $3.7 trillion, 5th largest economy globally
- UPI transactions: 10+ billion/month (2024)
- Gig economy: 7.7 million workers, less than 5% have social security
- GDP growth: 7.3% (2024-25) — Ministry of Finance
- ChatGPT adoption: 100 million users in 2 months (fastest ever)
- Chandrayaan-3: ₹615 crore (less than many Hollywood films)
- Internet users in India: 800+ million
- Digital payments: India accounts for 46% of global real-time transactions
- Literacy rate: 77.7% (2021 census)
- Urban population: 35% and growing
- Working-age population: 1 billion by 2030
- Female labor force participation: ~25% (one of world’s lowest)
- Tata Group: $150+ billion revenue, present in 100+ countries
- Indian startup unicorns: 100+ (as of 2024)
- IT exports: $200+ billion annually
- PLI scheme allocation: ₹1.97 lakh crore across 14 sectors
“I Google suspicious numbers. Fabrication = automatic fail.” — IIM Faculty Interview, 2025
One candidate wrote “60% of startups fail due to lack of funding” in an essay marked by a startup founder. Score: 2/10. Never invent statistics. If unsure, use qualifiers: “Research suggests…” or “Studies indicate…” Better to be vague than demonstrably wrong.
Counter-Arguments: Balance vs Fence-Sitting
Here’s where most candidates fail: they confuse acknowledging complexity with taking no position. The evaluator comment on fence-sitting essays says it all: “Analysis without opinion is Wikipedia, not an essay.”
- “There are pros and cons to both sides”
- “It depends on the situation”
- “Only time will tell”
- “Different perspectives have validity”
- Shows inability to make decisions
- Evaluator sees no clear thinking
- Typical score: 4-5/10
- “Critics rightly note X; however, this fails to account for Y”
- “While the concern is valid in context Z, the broader evidence supports…”
- “I acknowledge limitation X, yet maintain position Y because…”
- Shows nuanced, mature thinking
- Takes clear position with awareness
- Typical score: 7-8+/10
Strong: Acknowledge complexity + provide SPECIFIC multi-layered solutions with forceful language. Use verbs, give concrete examples, show WHO does WHAT and HOW.
Challenge false dichotomies. When they give you “A vs B,” look for the hidden “C.” Take “Economic growth vs sustainability”—the smart answer recognizes synergy. Green industries create jobs. Environmental damage has economic costs. Sustainable practices ARE growth strategies. Find the third option that most candidates miss.
The Counter-Argument Formula
Use this four-step template for acknowledging opposing views without surrendering your position:
Step 1 – Label: “Critics argue that [opposing view]…”
Step 2 – Concede: “This concern has merit—[acknowledge valid point]…”
Step 3 – Rebut: “However, this perspective overlooks [your evidence/logic]…”
Step 4 – Reassert: “Therefore, [restate thesis with nuance]…”
Example applied: “Critics argue that remote work damages company culture and collaboration. This concern has merit—spontaneous office interactions do spark innovation. However, this perspective overlooks that modern collaboration tools enable structured interaction, while the documented productivity gains outweigh the collaboration costs. Therefore, companies should invest in hybrid models that deliberately design for both deep work and collaborative sessions.”
How to Write WAT in 15 Minutes
Understanding how to write WAT in 15 minutes is crucial for IIM-L, IIM-C, and similar formats. With only 15 minutes for 200-250 words, every second counts. You can’t afford to ramble.
The 2-11-2 Time Split
- Read topic twice—identify keywords
- Decide stance (30 seconds max)
- Jot 2-3 points in margin
- Pick ONE strong example
- Opening + Thesis (40 words, 2 min)
- Argument 1 with evidence (80 words, 5 min)
- Brief counter (50 words, 2 min)
- Conclusion (40 words, 2 min)
- Quick read for obvious errors
- Check thesis appears in first 50 words
- Verify conclusion matches opening
- Underline key sentences (+0.8 marks avg)
15-Minute Structure: Compact 3-Part
With 15 minutes, you can only develop ONE argument well. Don’t try to cover everything—go deep on one angle with strong evidence rather than shallow on three angles:
| Part | Words | Content |
|---|---|---|
| Opening | 40-50 | Hook + Thesis (no preview needed—jump straight in) |
| Body | 120-140 | ONE strong PEEL argument + brief counter-acknowledgment |
| Closing | 40-50 | Synthesis with Verb Test conclusion (WHO does WHAT) |
In 15 minutes, you can only develop ONE argument well. Depth beats breadth in short formats. One specific, named example with analysis beats three vague points. If your essay tries to cover “all perspectives,” it will cover none properly.
How to Write WAT in 20 Minutes
The 20-minute format (IIM-B, IIM-K, XLRI) gives you more room for nuance. Here’s how to write WAT in 20 minutes to maximize that time. Note: average time taken by 9+ scorers on 20-minute WAT is 16 minutes 40 seconds—they leave buffer for review.
The 3-14-3 Time Split
- Read topic carefully—identify type and keywords
- Decide position and one-sentence thesis
- List 3-4 potential arguments, select best 2
- Identify strongest counter-argument
- Choose one named example for each argument
- Opening + Thesis (50-60 words, 3 min)
- Argument 1 – PEEL format (80 words, 4 min)
- Argument 2 – PEEL format (80 words, 4 min)
- Counter + Rebuttal (50-60 words, 2 min)
- Conclusion with action (40-50 words, 2 min)
- Read entire essay once (not skimming)
- Fix grammar/spelling errors
- Check logical flow between paragraphs
- Ensure conclusion ties back to thesis
20-Minute Structure: Full 4-Part
| Part | Words | Content |
|---|---|---|
| Hook + Thesis | 50-60 | Attention-grabber + clear position statement |
| Argument + Evidence | 80-100 | PEEL paragraph with specific named example |
| Counter + Rebuttal | 60-80 | Acknowledge opposition honestly + rebut with logic |
| Conclusion | 40-50 | Synthesis + Verb Test call to action |
Average time taken by 9+ scorers on 20-minute WAT: 16 minutes 40 seconds. They leave buffer time for review. The 3-minute planning phase feels like wasted time but actually saves you 5+ minutes of mid-essay confusion and rewriting. Write your thesis sentence BEFORE starting the essay—everything else should support it.
How to Write WAT for IIM: School-Specific Strategies
Understanding how to write WAT for IIM means adapting to each school’s unique format, topic style, and evaluation priorities. What works at IIM-A won’t work at IIM-K.
| School | Time | Words | Style | Key Focus |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IIM Ahmedabad | 30 min | 300-350 | Case-based (AWT) | Analytical recommendations, quantify decisions |
| IIM Bangalore | 20 min | 250-300 | 15% Weight (HIGHEST) | Economic reasoning, strict grammar |
| IIM Calcutta | 15-20 min | 250 | Opinion-based | Strong stance, language strict |
| IIM Lucknow | 15 min | 200-250 | Abstract | Metaphors, creativity, quick interpretation |
| IIM Kozhikode | 20 min | 250-300 | HIGHLY Abstract | Unique angle, originality rewarded |
| IIM Indore | 10 min (FASTEST) | 200 | Current affairs | Speed + quick thinking paramount |
| XLRI | 20 min | 250-300 | Ethics-focused | Values, social responsibility, moral reasoning |
School-Specific Argument Strategies
Can We Write in Bullet Points in WAT?
This is one of the most common questions: can we write in bullet points in WAT?
The short answer: No. Bullet points rank #10 on the “Top 15 Evaluator Pet Peeves” list from IIM faculty interviews.
What WAT Actually Tests (That Bullets Can’t Show)
- Remote work benefits:
• Increased productivity
• Lower commute costs
• Better work-life balance - Remote work challenges:
• Collaboration issues
• Culture problems
• Management difficulties
- “Remote work offers documented benefits: TCS reported 21% higher productivity, while employees save an average 2 hours daily in commute time. However, these advantages come with collaboration challenges that require deliberate investment in digital infrastructure. The solution isn’t choosing one model, but designing hybrid approaches that capture both benefits—structured collaboration time paired with focused independent work.”
Some IIM-A AWT prompts may explicitly ask for recommendations in a structured format with specific headings. In such cases, follow the prompt instructions exactly. But for standard WAT topics, always write in paragraphs with complete sentences and logical transitions. When in doubt, prose wins.
Argument Mistakes That Kill Your Score
After analyzing evaluator feedback from hundreds of WAT essays, here are the argument mistakes that consistently result in low scores—and how to fix them:
| Mistake | What It Looks Like | The Fix |
|---|---|---|
| No Thesis | “There are many perspectives on this issue…” | State clear position in first 50 words: “Remote work should become the default…” |
| Generic Examples | “Many companies have benefited from technology…” | Name specific company: “When Reliance Jio launched in 2016, it disrupted telecom pricing overnight” |
| Evidence Without Analysis | Dropping statistics without explaining relevance | Always add “This demonstrates that…” or “The significance is…” after facts |
| One-Sided Argument | Only supporting points, no counter-argument | Include 50-60 words acknowledging opposition before your rebuttal |
| Vague Conclusions | “It depends on the situation” / “Only time will tell” | Apply Verb Test: “The government should implement X by Y timeframe” |
| Fabricated Statistics | “60% of startups fail due to lack of funding” | If unsure, use qualifiers: “Research suggests…” or omit numbers entirely |
-
Thesis stated within first 50 words
-
At least ONE specific, named example with numbers
-
Body paragraph follows PEEL structure
-
Counter-argument acknowledged (not ignored)
-
Rebuttal provided after counter-argument
-
Conclusion passes the Verb Test (WHO does WHAT)
-
No bullet points—all flowing prose with transitions
-
All statistics verifiable (or qualified with “research suggests”)
-
1WAT Tests Argumentation, Not WritingThink like a lawyer building a case, not a writer crafting prose. Every argument needs Claim + Evidence + Reasoning. Beautiful writing without argument scores 5/10.
-
2Apply the Verb TestIf there’s no verb, there’s no action. Replace “India needs better education” with “Schools must integrate vocational training by Class 10.” Specify WHO does WHAT.
-
3Use PEEL for Every Body ParagraphPoint → Evidence → Explain → Link. This structure ensures every paragraph builds your case systematically with specific, named examples.
-
4Balance ≠ Fence-SittingAcknowledge counter-arguments honestly, then rebut them. “While critics note X, this overlooks Y” beats “Both sides have merit.” Take a clear stand.
-
5Never Use Bullet PointsBullet points demonstrate listing, not thinking. WAT tests your ability to connect ideas in flowing prose with logical transitions. Write in paragraphs.