Humans are often faced with the need to make decisions regarding complex issues where multiple interests need to be balanced, and where there are a number of complex arguments weighing in opposite directions. The ability of humans to understand and internalize the underlying argumentation structure resulting from reasoning about complex issues is limited by the human cognitive ability. The cognitive limit can manifest itself both in relation to an inappropriate level and amount of detail in the presentation of information, as well as in the structuring of the information and the representation of the interrelationships between constituting arguments. The GATM model provides a structured way to represent reasoning, and can be useful both in the decision-making process as well as when communicating a decision. In this work a component-based overview of the GATM model is provided in the context of security policy reasoning, where previous work has shown that decision-making transparency and improved understanding of the reasoning behind a security policy may lead to a beneficial impact on policy compliance.