I actually worked at a company where someone’s job was to just make nice Power Point presentations. I’m not being facetious, that’s how the guys actually described his role as.
When I watch conference recordings from CCC, Defcon, Black Hat, GDC, etc., "powerpoints" (slidedecks) work just fine for me, I'm highly engaged for hours on end. Maybe it's not the format that's the issue but the content, and PPT is just being scapegoated?
In a way, even most high quality YouTube content is little more than a presentation.
FYI, site is down, so this is only in reaction to the title. Likely the only valid excuse for ever doing so.
A lot of people are really bad at making slide decks, and PowerPoint often is the lazy presenters tool of choice, so it falls on the sword.
When I was last leading a team we prepared extensively for our demos. We used PowerPoint, as everyone did, but we reviewed the deck several times as a team, moving things 1 pixel this way or that way to make sure everything was lined up perfectly. If someone was getting into the weeds, we’d pull them out. If someone was talking about what they did instead of how it related to the user, we’d redirect their focus to make sure the presentation would be meaningful to the audience. If we were handing off between people, we’d practice that so it was smooth without and fumbling or people not knowing how to share a screen. We would spread this out over 3 separate meetings with time between for people to tweak and tune their parts. We’d also be thinking about the demo at the end of the sprint during sprint planning to make sure it was something we could show, and we collected what we needed along the way to show the value.
The end result was really positive feedback from everyone and even after a year our demos were very well attended. One manager with 30 years in the company showed up to one of our demos and said it was the best presentation he had ever seen at the company. The little things really matter to give a good impression at the end of the day.
When most people make a slide deck, they are doing it as an obligation to check a box, and it sucks. In my view, if we couldn’t properly explain to our stakeholders what it is we did and why it mattered, we might as well not do anything at all. Those demos were our public image to the organization and that was how people would see and judge us. In many ways, the demos mattered more than the work itself, and needed the same care (or more). Much like people judging the cleanliness of a restaurant’s kitchen by how clean the bathrooms are, the quality and inner workings of the team are judged by the demos. Lazy PowerPoints are indicative of issues throughout the team.
My current team (I’m an individual contributor on it) has garbage presentations put together by a lazy person, and it shows. I hate it. No one really knows what we do, and someone just got laid off for failing to properly explain the value of what he was working on to leadership. Poor presentations, and direct leadership not making this a priority, cost him his job as far as I can tell. Prior to the layoffs, he was very outspoken about our lack of quality demo and tried to champion making things better, as did I to some degree, but we got zero support, and I was explicitly told not to step in and help.
So yeah, it’s not PowerPoint, it’s the people who are being tasked with making most of them and their mental framework behind what they’re doing.
Jeff Bezos doesn't belive in toilet breaks or healthy working environments either... when is the next clickbait "Billionaire c*t does this, maybe you should too?" article?
The site appears to be down. HM hug of death, maybe?
Writing isn't just communication—it's a thinking tool that forces clarity and precision. Yet I still get pushback when advocating for written narratives over slide decks in technical decision-making. Writing is frequently considered "extra work" :(
Blaming the tool for poor/lazy use of it is a cheap and easy attack.
At the end of the day PowerPoint is nothing special, it's just that many people start preparing a topic/subject by making bullet lists. If you're lazy, your job is done: you copy 1to1 that list into a sequence of slides and call it a day.
If you're slightly less lazy, you might look for images/graphs/content from somewhere else to support your presentation.
Everything changes when you regard the slides as being 100% for the audience and not for you, the speaker. That's when you start thinking about the UX of that, putting yourself into the shoe of who's forced to sit through what you're trying to deliver.
But again, blaming the tool is easy and doesn't address the root cause: many people who give presentations, either don't want to give them (someone might have told them that they must) or they do it purely for themselves (or don't really care about the audience).
nothing grinds my gears more than "management wisdom" like this and people who then attribute success to small details like that.
amazon could have thrived the same way had they used powerpoint, maybe even more. we will never know. also, different people communicate differently. dictating 6-pagers makes you select for people who prefer that, therefore having less diversity in thinking.
The navy seals have been on successful missions and they basically only use PowerPoint for meetings , at least the last time I read a book written by someone senior in the leadership…
Perhaps, but at my current place I think we have suffered a lot from powerpoint thinking. It's basically impossible for us to look back at past information and make sense of it, because it's all powerpoint presentations which were intended to be given by someone who had the info fresh in their mind. It also encourages quite a loose form of thinking about something, compared to having to write a proper report with a well-presented argument: I'm trying to encourage people to put in the effort, and when I do so myself, I often find myself correcting my own errors just in the process of writing such a report, even if no-one else reads it.
There will be many negative comments here so let me add a positive: writing helps you think. More so than making ppt. My guess that it is helpful in some cases to force this level of detailed thought.
While disliking most of Jeff Bezo's philosophy including "leadership principles" nonsense, I agree with this hard. Docs/memos are just better. Too bad it's all PowerPoint at my company, and in some cases, we would already have internal document as "formal specs", then create a separate PowerPoint file for review discussions. Any modification is done twice. This is just ridiculous.
One thing I don't see mentioned: in internal technical presentations, I often find myself working hard to make something fit into one PowerPoint slide or manage the layout, and think about whether something should be on slide A or slide B. All of that is just time wasted, and a problem that does not exist with docs (mostly).
I feel like this is like only reading fiction and then deciding that "books are only for lying" or only seeing Mr. Beast videos on YouTube and deciding YouTube is only brainrot
People should figure out what works in a given situation. Sometimes a PowerPoint is the right tool, sometimes not. Blanket rules, “X is bad,” just close options.
so true, but they can also be good for "overviews/shallow introductions"
the main issue is that some presentation programs are just way to clunky to use them for use cases like 6 times a year with low time investment create shallow introduction presentation (without needing to spend a lot of time to "learn" how to use the tool, that wouldn't be worth it for 6 times a year)
so outside of "selling" (or conferences etc.) the introduction/shallow overview point kinda dies, too.
As a side note how the f* did MS manage to make (web) Powerpoint in their Office360 suite so bad?
I agree in terms to how it's mostly used. I think PowerPoint can be PowerFul when it's used as a visual tool to explain things that need complex diagrams.
However those situations aren't that common. And even when they occur the person making the ppt might not have the skill to design it properly, it needs some graphical design chops and ppt is a pretty poor graphical tool with a ton of nasty quirks.
But how I see it mostly used is for endless rows of standard template slides full of text. This is where the term death by PowerPoint comes from.
It's wild to me that the use of PP and being prepared are held up as antithetical. I don't see how the practices at Amazon aren't in service of the real problem with meetings: they're too often used for information transfer vs. problem solving. You can't expect people to have anything of value to say when you do the "big reveal" (often via the PP wall of text) and then immediately ask them to solution. I see this ALL THE TIME, including a recent meeting at work where the findings of a consultant - including this fact - were shown to everyone for the first time before we immediately jumped into a brainstorming session.
Saying "no PP" is the same as saying no to whiteboards, or taking notes or sync meetings, or any tool/process that can be mis-used. I went to business school so essentially have a Bachelor of PowerPoint degree, and one of the few-I-mean-great truths it left me was the hard work to make a good presentation; it's a different medium that most just phone-in with some quick copy & paste. I believe the process at Amazon is addressing the fact that everyone is very busy, and if they just start the meeting it's low-quality "advice-style" contributions, so it's better to eat the cost of waiting for everyone to read. This itself feels like a leadership trick that's actually for the executives who are too busy to consume everything async, but it seems better than the alternative for Amazon. I imagine it too is gamed, with people preparing before hand, then pretending to see memos for the first time yet having amazing, well-tought-out strategies ready to propose.
33 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 58.2 ms ] threadBest meetings, no presentations and they get into details. His rule/method interests me.
In a way, even most high quality YouTube content is little more than a presentation.
FYI, site is down, so this is only in reaction to the title. Likely the only valid excuse for ever doing so.
When I was last leading a team we prepared extensively for our demos. We used PowerPoint, as everyone did, but we reviewed the deck several times as a team, moving things 1 pixel this way or that way to make sure everything was lined up perfectly. If someone was getting into the weeds, we’d pull them out. If someone was talking about what they did instead of how it related to the user, we’d redirect their focus to make sure the presentation would be meaningful to the audience. If we were handing off between people, we’d practice that so it was smooth without and fumbling or people not knowing how to share a screen. We would spread this out over 3 separate meetings with time between for people to tweak and tune their parts. We’d also be thinking about the demo at the end of the sprint during sprint planning to make sure it was something we could show, and we collected what we needed along the way to show the value.
The end result was really positive feedback from everyone and even after a year our demos were very well attended. One manager with 30 years in the company showed up to one of our demos and said it was the best presentation he had ever seen at the company. The little things really matter to give a good impression at the end of the day.
When most people make a slide deck, they are doing it as an obligation to check a box, and it sucks. In my view, if we couldn’t properly explain to our stakeholders what it is we did and why it mattered, we might as well not do anything at all. Those demos were our public image to the organization and that was how people would see and judge us. In many ways, the demos mattered more than the work itself, and needed the same care (or more). Much like people judging the cleanliness of a restaurant’s kitchen by how clean the bathrooms are, the quality and inner workings of the team are judged by the demos. Lazy PowerPoints are indicative of issues throughout the team.
My current team (I’m an individual contributor on it) has garbage presentations put together by a lazy person, and it shows. I hate it. No one really knows what we do, and someone just got laid off for failing to properly explain the value of what he was working on to leadership. Poor presentations, and direct leadership not making this a priority, cost him his job as far as I can tell. Prior to the layoffs, he was very outspoken about our lack of quality demo and tried to champion making things better, as did I to some degree, but we got zero support, and I was explicitly told not to step in and help.
So yeah, it’s not PowerPoint, it’s the people who are being tasked with making most of them and their mental framework behind what they’re doing.
Writing isn't just communication—it's a thinking tool that forces clarity and precision. Yet I still get pushback when advocating for written narratives over slide decks in technical decision-making. Writing is frequently considered "extra work" :(
I was even so frustrated that I've put together https://www.bobek.cz/written-narratives/
At the end of the day PowerPoint is nothing special, it's just that many people start preparing a topic/subject by making bullet lists. If you're lazy, your job is done: you copy 1to1 that list into a sequence of slides and call it a day.
If you're slightly less lazy, you might look for images/graphs/content from somewhere else to support your presentation.
Everything changes when you regard the slides as being 100% for the audience and not for you, the speaker. That's when you start thinking about the UX of that, putting yourself into the shoe of who's forced to sit through what you're trying to deliver.
But again, blaming the tool is easy and doesn't address the root cause: many people who give presentations, either don't want to give them (someone might have told them that they must) or they do it purely for themselves (or don't really care about the audience).
What are the alternatives?
amazon could have thrived the same way had they used powerpoint, maybe even more. we will never know. also, different people communicate differently. dictating 6-pagers makes you select for people who prefer that, therefore having less diversity in thinking.
One thing I don't see mentioned: in internal technical presentations, I often find myself working hard to make something fit into one PowerPoint slide or manage the layout, and think about whether something should be on slide A or slide B. All of that is just time wasted, and a problem that does not exist with docs (mostly).
so true, but they can also be good for "overviews/shallow introductions"
the main issue is that some presentation programs are just way to clunky to use them for use cases like 6 times a year with low time investment create shallow introduction presentation (without needing to spend a lot of time to "learn" how to use the tool, that wouldn't be worth it for 6 times a year)
so outside of "selling" (or conferences etc.) the introduction/shallow overview point kinda dies, too.
As a side note how the f* did MS manage to make (web) Powerpoint in their Office360 suite so bad?
However those situations aren't that common. And even when they occur the person making the ppt might not have the skill to design it properly, it needs some graphical design chops and ppt is a pretty poor graphical tool with a ton of nasty quirks.
But how I see it mostly used is for endless rows of standard template slides full of text. This is where the term death by PowerPoint comes from.
Saying "no PP" is the same as saying no to whiteboards, or taking notes or sync meetings, or any tool/process that can be mis-used. I went to business school so essentially have a Bachelor of PowerPoint degree, and one of the few-I-mean-great truths it left me was the hard work to make a good presentation; it's a different medium that most just phone-in with some quick copy & paste. I believe the process at Amazon is addressing the fact that everyone is very busy, and if they just start the meeting it's low-quality "advice-style" contributions, so it's better to eat the cost of waiting for everyone to read. This itself feels like a leadership trick that's actually for the executives who are too busy to consume everything async, but it seems better than the alternative for Amazon. I imagine it too is gamed, with people preparing before hand, then pretending to see memos for the first time yet having amazing, well-tought-out strategies ready to propose.
Every meeting decision point was either correct or a rounding error cost and quick firing for incompetence.
It’s why ex-Amazon is the 2x resume line to look for even now.