we certainly do agree on a great deal!

But you captured my main point really well – most people aren’t comedians or actors, so they think they can’t “do it” without a Powerpoint crutch. And they don’t try.

But my coaching has shown that “ordinary” people can put actors and comedians to shame, when they talk about something they truly care about, and enjoy what they are doing.

And sometimes the lack of visual support forces them to really _explain_ their points, to look for understanding in the eyes of the audience, and to use (often unspoken) emotional channels.

It’s wonderful to behold – more people should try it!

Thanks for the conversation!

Adam

With regards to the idea that the focus should primarily be on the presenter, not on the screen… Maybe, sometimes, for some presenters, and some topics. But it’s actually easier for an audience to process information when looking at a screen than at a face (cognitive load), so there’s probably a role for both.

Besides, not all sales presenters are also stand-up comedians or actors, and they may need visual support to help them get their points across.

Barack Obama or Bill Clinton don’t need to use PowerPoint. But not many people can talk as well as they can.

sorry to be slow in coming back. Been busy…

No matter how complex a product is, the reasons for buying it should be simple. They invariably are – or the product is in trouble.

So the simple reasoning (“this machine catches 24% more cancers, here’s roughly how, and here are three leading hospitals that bought it for that reason”) belongs in the presentation.

_Detailed_ information on the studies showing it’s effectivity, the microbiological details of how it works, and the phone numbers of those referees) belong on clearly referenced and footnoted handouts that the customer can take along, read at leisure, check, check again, and show to precisely those colleagues.

(PS Sure, I might need to throw up a pathology pic for a few seconds to show the wonderful dramatic results, but after that they need to be looking at me again – so the screen should be off. And that pathology pic will be repeated in my handouts, so they can show the other docs.)

All the best,

Adam

Agree about the ‘B’ key tip – it’s one of the keyboard shortcuts we teach presenters, and is of course vitally important.

Many of our clients need to develop sales presentations to sell complex products and services. These presentations aim to persuade, but there is a need to convey complex information at the same time – otherwise, how can one make a sensible decision about which medical diagnostic device or insurance product to buy? The need to inform is most obvious in complex fields, but it is always there. After all, buying is a mixture of the rational and the emotional. How can a prospect make a rational decision to buy if the person selling doesn’t present any information? Moreover, how can they go and explain their recommendation on whether to buy (or not) to colleagues?

Trying to sell without informing can be unpersuasive, and leave critical advantages poorly understood; trying to inform without remembering to sell is just plain daft. Sales presentations aren’t about teaching, but they may well require the presentation of complex ideas in a simple, straightforward, and memorable way.

There’s a simple alternative to the spotlight option: the “B” (black) button… Darken the screen, and the presenter has a chance to shine.

I don’t think presentations are ever the best place to present highly complex information. They are too linear, and too one-way. For complex content, a document or WBT (where the audience can choose its own speed) or a workshop (where the audience can explore the information with a guide) is demonstrably better.

Presentations are for persuading, not informing. That this fact is so often forgotten, is the main reason that so many presentations fail.

Cheers!

Adam
Work•Play•Experience

On your last point, about not using slides at all… Again, this has got to depend on what you are presenting, right? Political speeches can inspire without the use of visual aids. But when presenting complex information, sometimes slides make things more memorable. We often need visual aids – that’s why blackboards were invented.

Today, whiteboards have their place – but why not use PowerPoint to prepare the visuals in advance (hand-sketched if you want) to take some of the pressure off the presenter? Not everybody is comfortable sketching.

Theater directors and stand-up comedians take great pains with lighting. They know that our eyes are drawn to light, so we will tend to look at the brightest thing in the room (unless it is _too_ bright).

This means that the brightest thing in the room needs to be – of course – the presenter. Not the screen, not the striplighting, and not the light from the hallway. So ideally:

- screen not too bright
- gentle light in the room
- good lighting on presenter (a medium strength spotlight is ideal)
- semi-darkness in corridor outside

Better still, of course, is when we follow the above rules, but leave out the screen completely. After all, the presentation is you! … http://bit.ly/mQzmp

I particularly like your take on not having titles that string together to a story. I try and encourage my clients to think in terms of *headlines*, not *titles*….

…. and as for slides that makes sense without a presenter; that’s like asking a juggler for his balls and wondering why it’s tricky!

Simon