In a previous post ‘How Memos Are More Powerful Than Powerpoints to Structure Thoughts‘ I argued against Powerpoint as a way to develop adequate content. In this excellent post ‘Death by PowerPoint: the slide that killed seven people‘, an actual example of a deadly powerpoint slide is exposed: an engineers’ slide during the analysis of the incident on the Columbia space shuttle launch that eventually lead to the loss of the spaceship upon re-entry.
In this example, the content of the slide is accurate, but the way it is presented, highlighting the wrong part of the content, may have led to take the wrong decision. The actual technical argument (the event that happened was way beyond any test or simulation and thus, available data points could not be used) was hidden in small font at the back of the slide. Again, a well argued technical note would possibly have led to structure it differently and more time could have been taken to review evidence (read the full post, it is extremely enlightening).
Another take away from this post if of course, that the way information is presented on the slide is also essential in the meaning that is conveyed, and that may people probably don’t read beyond the title!
I recently had another argument about the usage of powerpoints, this time for preparation of consulting commercial proposals. Again, I find that in that case where it is all about building a compelling story, powerpoint is not the most adequate mean. At best a shortcut.
As any tool, Powerpoint takes skill to use it properly and in the right situations. And we have not learnt enough that other tools can be used more effectively in many instances. I think I may start a crusade against the usage of Powerpoint as a cognitive shortcut in any situation!
