Why a good presentation is not a good leave behind/report

I am involved in a fairly long LinkedIn discussion about presentations and presenting (). The drift of the conversation has recently shifted to whether on document can be both a good presentation and good record of the study/report/leave behind/ standalone presentation. My view is emphatically NO!

Below I have reproduced and modified my post to share it more widely.

My view of what a client debrief should include on the screen includes:

1. Only those parts of the questionnaire that contribute to the answer (i.e. don’t display all the questions).
2. Only significant differences get displayed (on quant studies) .
3. Min font size for labels and numbers on chart 16 point .
4. Min font for text 24 point, with major points going up to 48 point (some caveats or warnings might occasionally be as small as 16 point).
5. No bullets, or very few bullets in those rare cases where a list is actually useful 
6. Only show bases sizes where they help interpretation (which is rare). For example, I will say that the data are based on 750 interviews, and I will warn you when I am working with smaller numbers.
7. No detailed methodology/sample section.
8. In most cases I should be able to talk to the slides, introduce my thinking, tell the story, and provide conclusions/recommendations in less than 30 minutes, ideally less than 25 minutes. 

Even when I am presenting heavy quant data, for example choice based modelling, I show very few numbers. Numbers are the tools I use, as an analyst, to find the answers. What the client (in most cases) wants are answers, not the chance to work with the numbers. If I have an insight manager who loves the numbers, I try to have two debriefs; 1) a methodology/analysis version with the insight manager, perhaps lasting an hour (often using remote techniques such as GoToMeeting), and 2) answers version for the insight manager’s internal clients.

When I follow these guidelines (remembering that all clients are unique and consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds) I produce a PowerPoint deck that is great during the presentation, but is not great as a leave behind.

When I am a receiver of presentations, and when I have researched client needs, the sorts of things that I want in the leave behind are:

1. Methodology, sample, and fieldwork dates (99% of my presentations do not put the fieldwork date on the screen, I will simply say things like "and the fieldwork was in June" or "the fieldwork was in the week after the new product launched", but in the leave behind I want to know when the fieldwork was done, whether it was F2F, CATI, etc, who the sample were etcetera. For regular clients, the description of the sample might be as brief as “we interviewed you normal selection of heavy and medium buyers, in May”, on the screen this might be represented by one word, e.g. Who?
2. Data from all of the questions I have paid for. I want these in the leave behind so I can help use the data to answer future questions. 
3. The text of the questions, in case there is ambiguity what a presentation really means. 
4. An executive summary of 500 to 1000 words. 
5. Warnings and caveats. In the presentation I will say those warnings and caveats that are relevant to the audience. In the leave behind, I do not know the audience, so I have to include all the relevant warnings and caveats.
6. More detailed conclusions and recommendations. 
7. Information about my company and how further contact can be initiated (almost every client I have spoken to hates it when a debrief contains several pages of company background, they are fine in a pitch, fine in a leave behind, but 99% of the time they have no place in a debrief) 

 There are many ways of creating a suitable leave behind, for example a revised PowerPoint (particularly one that uses the notes page well), a report, an online hyperlinked document, an interactive model in Excel (with help/documentation features). But a good presentation is not a good leave behind.

Yes, I accept that a good presenter can work with a slide deck that has too much information on the screen, which has text and labels that are too small, but why do it? Why not use the presentation to support the speaker, not the speaker to support the materials? 

Comments

[Brandon Watts]

Excellent post and discussion. The bottom line is Market Researchers seem to have ignored their own advice. Its important to know the client and develop the reporting solutions that will maximize the utility of the insights and help the client succeed. A "one size fits all" just won't accomplish that. While the details are are required for context, the most important thing is providing a story or roadmap in the most useful format possible to move the client ahead.

@ResearchRocks shared some interesting thoughts on this topic (http://www.researchrockstar.com/powerpoint-based-reports-overused-or-just-abused/) and more can be found here as well: http://brandaperture.net/2010/03/24/more-data-doesnt-mean-better-insight/

[Ray Poynter]

Hi Sandy, I think your post highlights the three most important points about debriefs, 1) the research should deliver what the client needs, 2) not all clients are the same, 3) not all projects are the same.

When I am a client it is in my capacity as a local politician. In my role as an elected councillor I am not the research buyer, I am the end user (since 1983 I have spent 20 years as a County Councillor and 24 as a Borough Councillor - i.e. some of the time I have been on two authorities.

If a research company is presenting the case for a strategic investment in, say, a town centre, I want a story, I don't want many numbers, and I want insight. However, in a separate document, I want the methodology, the questionnaire, the basic data, and a description of how the insight was arrived at. A Town centre re-modelling takes about 5 years from concept to post-implementation review, during that time there will be elections and some of the politicians will have changed. The background document has to remain coherent for at least the five years, and sometimes longer.

If a research company is presenting a benchmarking study or a satisfaction study, I am required by law to look at the individual scores, there is a presumption in Government guidance that we will use Red (i.e. have missed targets), Amber, Green highlighting of problems (BTW, deviating from Government guidance can attract sanctions if anything goes wrong). So the main presentation has to show all the scores that are red, along with the question that was asked. The ability to tell a story in a benchmarking presentation is less, the two most typical ways are a) here is the overall story, now here are the detailed numbers, or b) here are the detailed numbers, now here is the overall story. Attempts to blend the story and the numbers usually fail as the councillors will stop the presentation too often and get into lengthy debates about not just the causes of the problem, but their pet views on the remedies.

If you look at the comment from the ResearchGeek you will see reference to clients who want numbers. But even more pointedly, look at the comment by Alistair Nicoll (who has been involved in the commissioning of more research in the UK than most people) who finds he has to specify a Word report in order to get research companies to deliver what he needs.

I think the key point is that what is shown in the debrief should be different to what the client is left with as a permanent record of the project. We may disagree about the detail of what is shown in the debrief and what is in the permanent record, but I doubt we think that what is shown can or should be the same as the permanent record?

[Sandy]

The emphasis on all this is in the wrong place. The objective should be to tell a story which answers the client's business questions. NO part of the questionnaire should be shown. Only words and images (charts, tables, photos, etc.) that help tell the story should be in the presentation. Often what matters are not individual questions, but combinations of questions. The reference to "data from all of the questions I have paid for" is particularly off-base. As a client, I don't pay for questions. I pay for information. Yes, I want a complete set of tables, but that is a secondary deliverable. Part of the story is the methodology. What details of the methodology are important will vary by study, but in some cases sample definition, timing, location(s), etc. are critical to keeping the findings in context. Everything that is secondary to the story should be in back-up. Information on your company and how to initiate further content should NOT be included. The last thing any research client wants is to have others in the company going directly to the consultants. Your client knows how to contact you. Remember, you succeed only when you help your client succeed.

[Alistair Nicoll]

"I produce a PowerPoint deck that is great during the presentation, but is not great as a leave behind".

How I wish all research agencies would learn this important lesson - I am reduced to specifying in briefs I want a word report to stop agencies thinking that all they need to do is leave the powerpoint

[ResearchGeek]

There are plenty of clients (here in India especially) who still need to see all the numbers, which is hard - but we haven't done a good enough job of getting them to trust us well enough to just give them the answers unfortunately, I guess we're a bit behind the more developed markets on that front.

Anyway - the point on notes pages is essential. Write notes pages, but don't use them whilst presenting is what I always say. It helps you to de-clutter your charts without producing a separate leave-behind document, but importantly, it also helps you to de-clutter your thoughts and structure your presentation into one cohesive argument rather than a series of unrelated charts.

[Praz]

This a really insightful post Ray-thanks (specially because I work in MR but on the Operational side). Particularly love "What the client (in most cases) wants are answers, not the chance to work with the numbers".