Bill Gates used his annual TED platform this week to discuss the unfortunate state of school budgets. As a speaker, I think he is getting more and more comfortable—I’ve talked about the “education of Bill Gates before.” His slides this year were good, definitely better than two years ago (malaria), but I don’t think they were as effective or well-designed as last year’s talk on the global emissions.
Just my opinion. Take a watch!
Great, great article by Jeff Rosenblum in Ad Age.
“A presentation consisting of 50 slides of charts and graphs virtually never ends with a win…”
About 2pm yesterday afternoon I started getting emails… “Are you watching Cuomo? He’s using PowerPoint!”
Andrew Cuomo was inaugurated yesterday as the next Governor of New York, and he gave a State of the State address. His speech was certainly not on my radar, but I eventually watched it all (you can watch it here). And yes, he did indeed deliver a presentation filled with on screen slides.
It could very well be the first time PowerPoint was used for such an address.
So, how did he do? I give him a “B.”
I’m still not 100% decided as to whether PowerPoint was appropriate for the occasion, but what I do know is that from a purely presentational standpoint, he did a lot right. (And expect him to continue to get a lot of press on this one.)
THE GOOD
THE BAD
THE UNDECIDED
* * *
And since we’re talking political PowerPoint, it’s a good time to remind everyone of what PowerPoint might have enabled at Gettysburg…
I finally saw Social Network over the Holiday break and took special note of a scene in which Bill Gates returns to Harvard to deliver a talk to an audience that includes Mark Zuckerberg—”the next Bill Gates.” It reminded me that in my seminar on presentation design, I come down pretty hard on Bill Gates as a presenter. The theme of my seminar is creating a contemporary and new style of presentation, not dated-looking “PowerPoints.” And just as I use Steve Jobs as an exemplar of good presenting and design, I use Bill Gates often as an example of bad, dated presentation design.
The problem is that my Bill Gates examples are largely 5-15 years old. Are my comparisons fair…?
You see, Bill Gates used to deliver some horrendous looking and ineffective “PowerPoints” while running Microsoft. His slides often looked like this.
The list of sins is lengthy: Jargon, little negative space, decoration instead of communication, poor use of imagery, death by bullet points, etc.
But is condemning Gates for these slides like condemning me for wearing parachute pants in high school? (No emails on this, please.)
So, I decided to take another look at what Gates has been up to lately with regard to presentation. I watched again his last two TED talks: the 2009 Malaria presentation and the2010 Energy Innovating to Zero talk. The 2009 talk is (in)famous in that Gates created a coup de presentation in releasing a jarful of mosquitos in the auditorium. That’s what people remember, and he should be lauded for creating such a memorable moment (that garnered great press). But watching the talk again, I saw too much old thinking on the screen. These are some of the slides from 2009…
While there is progress for Gates here (some full-screen imagery, one message per slide), the presentation suffers from chart junk, unclear data messaging and tiny type. The mosquitos rocked; the slides did not. They barely looked designed. Not that everyone should need a presentation designer, but you think Gates might have afforded himself the luxury…
But then I watched the 2010 talk which included slides such as these:
It seems that in the span of a single year, Bill Gates found religion. His 2010 slides are downright gorgeous. They’re simple, elegant, well-designed graphically and above all: clear. They tell a visual story instead of obfuscating it. This time, Gates’ memorable moment (“releasing” fire flies) was kind of a dud. But his slides kicked ass.
Bill has got a lot of catching up to do, but I’m glad to see that he has turned a corner.
So, will I continue making fun of him? Yes. Until he calls over to Redmond and makes the PowerPoint team fix the page numbering glitches…
What’s the best pitch I’ve seen in recent years?
Easy. Don Draper’s Kodak Carousel pitch from Season 1 of Mad Men. For those who are not fans of the show, take a work break right now and watch the scene.
Don’s presentation very clearly uses emotion to persuade—in fact, it’s probably 100% emotion.
What kind of speaker are you?
Emotional or Analytical?
Looking at another presenting Series of 2, nearly every part of a presentation can be classified as either emotional or analytical, as can an overall style and approach. Don Draper or Martin Luther King are certainly more on the emotional end of the spectrum while your high school math teacher was probably mostly analytical. But a presentation need not and should not choose one or the other.
A successful persuasive presentation should be a mix of the emotional and analytical.
So, what is the right proportion? It will be different for every presenter and for every audience and subject matter. I would guess that the vast majority of business presentations are mostly if not all analytical. But just because you think your material dry or your audience overly serious, it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t inject emotion. People are rarely moved to act absent emotion. Colin Powell’s UN presentation prior to the Iraq war included a lot of analysis, diagrams and data. But probably the biggest “selling point” was the prop vial of anthrax he held up. There may be no greater emotion than fear…
So, what types of content fall into each category?
ANALYTICAL
Data • Hard Facts • Tables • Diagrams & Charts • Processes • Analyzed Solutions
EMOTIONAL
Stories • Theatricality • Props • Fear • Humor • Personal Experiences
I placed a few famous presenters on an Analytical/Emotional continuum. Where do you think you land on this as a presenter?
There’s a danger in veering too far to the left or right on this scale in that your credibility and effectiveness can be harmed. Jim Cramer receives a lot of criticism for thinking too much with his gut and not enough with his head with his financial advice to viewers. (Of course, Alan Greenspan never had his own TV show.) Similarly, Glenn Beck receives criticism for too many tears, not enough facts. And finally, Barack Obama was a very emotional candidate, but many feel as though he has lost a lot of that inspirational fire since moving to the White House. Has his presenting style changed?
And now, for one last example out of Redmond, WA. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer…
I’ve discussed Edward Tufte before, but I wanted to let everyone in the New York area that the “godfather of information design” will coming to town to deliver his one-day seminars on November 4th, 5th, 8th & 9th. To register for the seminars, which include copies of each of his 4 books, swing by Tufte’s website.
If you can’t make it to New York, here are a few more upcoming seminars.
* * * * *
New York advertising giant Satchi & Satchi is hosting a second “7×7” evening of presentations.
In this 7×7 format, 7 unique and smart, but completely unrelated speakers are each given 7 minutes to talk about something unique. I attended the last session back in May, which included everything from the TED Conference’s Chris Anderson to a cooking demonstration to a live play by play of a speed chess match by ESPN’s chess commentator. Yes, apparently ESPN has a chess commentator.
The #1 reason we people give bad presentations is because they see bad presentations. I have no idea if this month’s group are good presenters, but it’s always good to see how a wide range of other presenters speakers do what they do.
Click here for more info including the lineup and to buy tickets.
Absent an introduction by a colleague or host, the first words your audiences hear should be your name and who you are. The situation might then call for a thank you or other acknowledgement. Depending on your style and situation, an opening joke might be appropriate. But after these few seconds, then what? I’m not talking about addressing the “situational problem” or the “pain,” I’m talking about introducing your presentation.
Lately I’ve become a fan of a technique encouraged by Gene Zelazny in his book, Say It With Presentations. It’s called P.I.P., and I love it because it gets everyone on the same page immediately and sets expectations. And it demonstrates respect for your audience and their time and attention.
In a matter of less than a minute, you should be able to clearly define for your audience your presentation’s:
PURPOSE
•
IMPORTANCE
(to your immediate audience)
•
PREVIEW
(of what’s the come)
Don’t be long-winded, and don’t get into the presentation itself. This is your elevator pitch.
You can be transparent with your PIP (“Before I start, I want to tell you the purpose and importance of today’s talk and give you a preview of…”) or more opaque (“Today is about increasing sales so we can avoid bankruptcy. I’m going to give you 3 strategies for…“)
Here is my own transparent personal PIP for a presentation that I give (after I introduce everyone in the room):
The last time I went to a convention in San Diego, I was 14 and it was a convention for magicians. So now I’m geeking out in a different way in that city.
In October for the first time I’ll be attending The Presentation Summit, the one and only annual conference dedicated to presentation.
Run by Rick Altman, who is the author of the awesomely titled,Why Most PowerPoint Presentations Suck & How You Can Make Them Even Better, the conference began under the title, “PowerPoint Live.” I’m happy they made the change since there is far more to on screen presentation than just one piece of Microsoft software.
From what I understand, the conference is targeted at presentation professionals at all levels. There will be sessions on how to use and make the most of PowerPoint (including special sessions for “beginners”), but there will also be talks on visual communication, webinars, digital photography and the business of the business.
And featured speakers include Nancy Duarte and Garr Reynolds, the two leading thought leaders when it comes to effective presentation.
Though the conference has sold out in the past, there are still spots open if anyone is interested in attending. Drop me a line if you decide to go. We’ll grab daiquiris by the pool. I mean, we’ll talk about serious presentation stuff…
I was in a day long seminar last week. It was quite good in many ways, but one of the biggest things they gave their attendees was that most wonderful gift of all: TIME.
They ended early.
The seminar was scheduled from 9:30-4pm, and we ended a little before 3pm.
In today’s overscheduled work environments, everyone wants to be as efficient as possible, but sometimes a bit of planned subterfuge is good for everyone. How often have you found yourself rushing to finish your material at 2:01 as people start streaming out, heading to their next meeting or phone call? (I found myself in this exact situation just last week.) But if you had just an extra 15 minutes of “scheduled” time, there would be no rush at all, no skipping over that last point, time for more questions, and a far more relaxed environment for all.
There’s another crucial aspect to ending early. It makes you seem more in control of your material and your presentation, and everyone feels as though the collective group has successfully achieved the meeting’s goal and received all the necessary information without struggle.
When I was directing theatre, I would always try to end my rehearsals early. You just can’t imagine how good it feels as an actor to get out at even 9:45pm instead of 10pm. If I let the cast go at 9:30, I might even get a, “You’re a really good director, Nolan…” But just as important as the time itself was the psychological boost it gave people: “We’re making so much progress and doing so well, that we can afford to finish early. That was a good rehearsal…” Directors who always go over and keep people late often have demoralized casts who feel beat down and are rarely in a mental place where they can do their best work. (I should point out that I am speaking of early actor-only rehearsals. I don’t think any tech rehearsal since Euripides has ended early…)
If you have 60 minutes of material, don’t schedule a 1 hour meeting. Make it 90 minutes. Start 5 minutes late (you know you will anyway), add 10 minutes for Q&A throughout and/or at the end, and finish 15 minutes early. Now you’ll have time to relax and not rush, to make every point, and make sure every question is answered. And your audience will get the present of 15 more minutes to their day. They won’t have to run to their desk to hop on that conference call they scheduled adjacent to your presentation. They can walk, get a cup of coffee, even discuss how brilliant your ideas are with you. You’ll be the hero of their morning.
Feel like you’re wasting employees’ time? Then make it a 75 minute meeting. Or better, take your 60 minutes of material and cut 10 minutes out. If you find you finish and find yourself genuinely with 10 minutes to spare (you won’t, but let’s imagine), then you can put back in those extra minutes.
Remember, nobody was ever fired for including too much information. But people are fired for not presenting the important information effectively.
