Discussion about this post

User's avatar
JD's avatar

I hated slides, derided them as lowbrow. I rebelled in my industry and wrote white papers when others sent slides. Then I saw the light. Here’s what changed my mind:

1) Tufte’s books: Beautiful Evidence, Visual Explanations, Envisioning Information, and my favorite, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. They show how well a 2D multimedia format can convey ideas, forms, and structure. Extremely educational for communicating anything remotely technical, logistical, or process based. Dynomight: I’d really like your particular kind of take on these.

2) Screens got better. Slides on a VGA projector are clunky. Slides on a high-res canvas carry plenty of detail and often text is 12 or even 10 point. Much information can be contained in a single slide (Tufte also makes a point about information density).

3) Text got cheaper to make. Information got more abundant. There is efficiency in reading a concise presentation without the fluff. I hold the opposite of Bezos: long arguments are for persuading. Slides are for data.

4) Text got cheaper to make part 2: consumers of text got buried (and it’s only accelerated in the last few years). In my industry (we work with SBIR contracts), customers used to ask for 25 page proposals for ~$100k funding grants. They’d get hundreds of them. Now they as for a 5 page slide deck as a first round. Just the facts.

5) Word is terrible at combining text, imagery, and data in a way that connects related items. A format like Publisher may have fended off slides. Basically slides in portrait orientation. Maybe not, because screens are in landscape.

6) You can spot bad slides at a glance. Low information slides look bad (non functional cartoons, large bullets, silly animations). Low information text looks like all the other text; you have to read at least some of it to figure out if it’s any good. Ironically, I think this creates headwinds for slides as a reputable format; it’s easy to share and ridicule the bad ones.

7) Conversations favor slides. Text is unidirectional from the writer to the reader. Slides hold information related to an idea and support discussion.

Sam's avatar
May 13Edited

The document culture took some getting used to, but it’s probably the single part of AWS’s workplace culture that I most appreciate (having worked there for some years now). PowerPoint is available for things like customer presentations and some other edge cases, but really is actively discouraged for internal meetings. Some observations I’ll add: 1/ at least during my tenure, although it is indeed typical for meetings to start with a 15 or 20 minute silent doc read, during that time people are adding comments to the document (using one of several cloud-based doc writing platforms); authors are actively answering the comments (with follow up comments) in real time during this period. By the time the silent reading period is over, there are often a few clearly contentious issues which can then form the basis of conversation. 2/ One side benefit (not consistent, but often enough across teams) is that it can increase visibility for junior employees, since their comments end up in the doc right alongside more senior people’s 3/ one group of people for whom this process works reliably less well is slow readers.

24 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?