A wish-list for presentations in 2009

It’s not going to happen, I know it’s not going to happen (and if it did, I’d be out of a job) but one of the things I’d love to see this New Year is for business presentations to be less shockingly bad.

Okay, it’s not up their with “Enough food in the right places so that no one is hungry” and “World Peace”, but it’s still a wish, right? Actually I’m drafting this in response to an Email from Olivia Mitchell (of Effective Speaking) who’s putting together a few of us in one place on one topic. It might make sense to poke around a couple of the other posts alongside this one, including the blog post which kind of kicked the whole thing of in some ways, by Laura Bergells.

So here goes: seriously(?), what would I like to see change in presentations for 2009?

Well firstly I’d like to see the ability of PowerPoint, Keynote, Impress (or whatever) to actually write in anything under 36 Pt removed – or at least wired to the power supply of the computer like this… for every point under 36 the user tried to use, they got 5 Volts of shock. Writing in 24 Pt gives 55Volts, which should be enough to draw anyone’s attention to the fact they’re doing something stupid, right? Writing in 14 Pt should pretty well fry someone’s fingers.

Secondly I’d like to see microphones built into data projectors and screens linked to some software which compares volumes and can tell if the presenter is facing the screen or the audience. Whenever there’s more volume directed to wards the screen, the data projector simple projects a black screen until the presenter turns to face their audience again….

You want serious suggestions?

What, you think I’m kidding? If I had a pound (or even a dollar) for every time someone’s done something stupid like the two ideas above I’d be a rich man!

And yet I know they’re not going to happen.

So what might I reasonably expect for presenters who’ve mastered the basics of facing the audience and make their slides read-able? Well, for one thing, I’d like to see people find a sensible balance between emotion and information in their slides. Presentations aren’t good at presenting detailed data but that doesn’t mean that a presenter shouldn’t have that information at his or her finger-tips if it’s needed.

All too often I see presentations which are either:

• full of detailed minutiae that the audience can’t read, remember or even bring themselves to care about; or
• full of vague assertions without supporting data or even enough valid research to cover a knatt (by the way, reading a couple of unreferenced websites does not count as research!)

Is it really asking too much for presenters to put together presentations which are based upon fact and research but which don’t drown their audience in those facts and details?

Based upon my experience of 2008, yes it is! :)

But some audiences want more detail than others, so how does the struggling presenter handle this? Too much detail and half your audience will die of bordom/lose the will to live. Too little detail and half your audience will be left saying “that’s all very well, but…..”. My suggestion is to keep your slides clean and simple (ideas, not details) but to have the details available for your audience somehow.

Perhaps this could be done by

• having well-written hand-outs to leave behind after the presentation for those who want to know the whys and where-fores. These will have to be different from the slides of course!
• cover the details verbally at an appropriate level – although this degree of ‘on the fly’ work can be challenging
• have some detail slides available in your deck which are shown or not depending on what the audience need at the time

I personally do a mix of all three, depending on the detailed circumstances. I know a few trainers and so on ‘have a bit of a downer’ on PowerPoint presentations because of its pre-fixed, linear structure but I’m afraid that just shows a lack of imagination and technical ability with the software as much as anything else.

Even with something as limited/limiting as PowerPoint it’s entirely possible to skip around slides as/when needed. Of course it’s easier in Keynote, using the ability to see different things on your computer screen than is shown to the audience but if you’re serious as a presenter you can make pretty much any software work for you if you put enough time and effort into it.

So maybe in one short sentence that’s what I’d like to see: presenters who put enough time, energy and effort into their presentations to find the right way to present the right balance between facts/details and emotions/ideas.

Is that really any harder than World Peace?