Hi Dan, once again an excellent video. I also always had trouble coming up with meaningful action titles. Not anymore. I now do the action title thing as follows: I imagine I'm talking to someone about something and don't have a slide to hand, but I want to convey a key message to the other person. With reference to your first slide (time 1:11), I would explain the following to my conversation partner: "Publicly and privately funded acute care Hospitals is the largest turnover and fastest growing segment in healthcare." Just imagine a normal conversation, then the action title is obvious.
Using the OODA loop is the most effective way to develop the action titles. If a title is not a clear observation that the business cares about, orientation is does not fit with the system of thinking at the client, decision options and tradeoffs are not clear or an action that is not SMART, don’t bother with the slide.
significant key words, suggest, imply, indicates, refer, point to , associate..The term “implication” refers to the indirect consequences or effects that result from a specific action or any statement.
Amazing as always, a request, could you make a video on flow of the presentation in the sense that how to decide the order of the slides to make sure they flow like a logical story (apart from the SCQA framework)
Amazing content, thank you for sharing your knowledge. I have one tiny question, where do we put "Now What" like recommendation in the same slide as the stakeholder wants to see the recommendation on the same slide. Thanks again
Dan, this is really useful stuff ("Subscribed"!). Would you say that there are specific types of presentation (mostly data-based) that are well suited to the McKinsey (pyramid, SCR) format, but others (e.g. teaching) maybe not so much? Any advice as to what to use when? Thanks!
Thanks Dave! Do you mean like the Oliver Wyman example? I think that structure is best used when the first line describes the chapter/section you’re in, then underneath you have the slide action title
Great session! I got a question for bullet point principle #1 : focus on the "so what" or implication -> It seems that audience could always comment either "1, this bullet point tells me nothing further than what the graph shows, so it's useless, remove it" or, on the other hand, "2, this bullet point is making an implication/argument/statement, that's beyond what the graph tells me, so it's not supported". How do you solve that? Thank you!
Great question! The nuance is that the chart will tell you “what the data is” but the action title will tell you “what the data means”. Does that help?
I may be completely off-base here, but at 5:20 you state that the most important parts of the slide are panels 2 and 3. I think they are not. They are consequences of panel 1. As a result, panels 1 and 3 are important. I would even leave panel 2 to be an appendix slide. it makes this slide at 5:20 overly complex. The slide after it (at 6:20) will in my experience only generate questions and confusion in a board room. Your commentary does not immediately resonate with me as a senior corporate member. When I see such examples in a presentation, I will discard the content quickly as "consultant-speak" The next slide at 07:25 talks about disruption, and yet, as an exec, I just see an overall parallel evolution. No disruption... I think you have the right ideas, but the examples are, at least for me, not really resonating. I do like your "so what" principle, and to be specific and to have the slide action title supported by the body.
Just want to say thank you for sharing your knowledge. Please keep going! You deserve more subscribers for your quality content!
Really appreciate that mate, thank you!
Hi Dan, once again an excellent video. I also always had trouble coming up with meaningful action titles. Not anymore. I now do the action title thing as follows: I imagine I'm talking to someone about something and don't have a slide to hand, but I want to convey a key message to the other person. With reference to your first slide (time 1:11), I would explain the following to my conversation partner: "Publicly and privately funded acute care Hospitals is the largest turnover and fastest growing segment in healthcare." Just imagine a normal conversation, then the action title is obvious.
That's a really cool way to think about it! Thanks for sharing, I'm sure others will love this tip
This is awesome. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. Definitely will help me create more engaging presentations with stronger story lines.
Glad it was helpful Scarlett!
Great tips! 100% agree this is the 80 for the 20 if trying to improve a deck!
Thanks Tom, appreciate it!
Dear Dan, I am happy to be person # 1000 to like this video,- this is really well done, thanks a lot! BTW, also loved the SCQR / SCR video!
Thanks so much! Can’t believe it got 1,000 likes!
Using the OODA loop is the most effective way to develop the action titles. If a title is not a clear observation that the business cares about, orientation is does not fit with the system of thinking at the client, decision options and tradeoffs are not clear or an action that is not SMART, don’t bother with the slide.
Thanks for sharing, really simple and clean explanation. Short as Sharp as you recommend!
My pleasure Hugo!
very useful information. keep up the good work
Thanks heaps!
Nice and well explained the concept... thanks a lot!
Most welcome!
significant key words, suggest, imply, indicates, refer, point to , associate..The term “implication” refers to the indirect consequences or effects that result from a specific action or any statement.
So grateful that found you in youtube, love u
Haha thanks - Feeling the love!
Thanks for your knowledge. This will help with two projects I am working on that I have to present to our HOA.
My pleasure Michael
Amazing as always, a request, could you make a video on flow of the presentation in the sense that how to decide the order of the slides to make sure they flow like a logical story (apart from the SCQA framework)
Great suggestion, I'll add it to the list 😊
Take 10% off our courses, PowerPoint templates, and consulting toolkits by using the code RUclips10 at: www.slidescience.co/products
Just found and love your channel.
Glad you're here mate!
Amazing content, thank you for sharing your knowledge. I have one tiny question, where do we put "Now What" like recommendation in the same slide as the stakeholder wants to see the recommendation on the same slide. Thanks again
Sorry mate I am not sure what you mean?
Great video. Thank you!
My pleasure! 😊
Dan, this is really useful stuff ("Subscribed"!).
Would you say that there are specific types of presentation (mostly data-based) that are well suited to the McKinsey (pyramid, SCR) format, but others (e.g. teaching) maybe not so much? Any advice as to what to use when? Thanks!
Hmm maybe! Most of my experience is with corporate reports, so I tend to use SCR in almost all situations. And thanks for the sub! 😊
Very helpful..also how did you do the chart ? Could you pls help explain
I used a PowerPoint add on called think-cell
What about slides we background, scope, or timeliness? Are these perhaps already action titled?
You can create a section called "background" and the slides within that section can still have action titles
Really enjoyed this, what are your opinions on the title being a general description with an action title in the subtitle?
Thanks Dave! Do you mean like the Oliver Wyman example? I think that structure is best used when the first line describes the chapter/section you’re in, then underneath you have the slide action title
Great session! I got a question for bullet point principle #1 : focus on the "so what" or implication -> It seems that audience could always comment either "1, this bullet point tells me nothing further than what the graph shows, so it's useless, remove it" or, on the other hand, "2, this bullet point is making an implication/argument/statement, that's beyond what the graph tells me, so it's not supported". How do you solve that? Thank you!
Great question! The nuance is that the chart will tell you “what the data is” but the action title will tell you “what the data means”. Does that help?
Great tips, cheers from Indonesia 👍
Thank you so much ❤
hi dan, does this apply this in thesis presentation?
I don’t see why not! 👍🏼
Thanks a lot
My pleasure!
Thank you
My pleasure MJ!
👏👏👏👏👏👏
I may be completely off-base here, but at 5:20 you state that the most important parts of the slide are panels 2 and 3. I think they are not. They are consequences of panel 1. As a result, panels 1 and 3 are important. I would even leave panel 2 to be an appendix slide. it makes this slide at 5:20 overly complex. The slide after it (at 6:20) will in my experience only generate questions and confusion in a board room. Your commentary does not immediately resonate with me as a senior corporate member. When I see such examples in a presentation, I will discard the content quickly as "consultant-speak" The next slide at 07:25 talks about disruption, and yet, as an exec, I just see an overall parallel evolution. No disruption...
I think you have the right ideas, but the examples are, at least for me, not really resonating.
I do like your "so what" principle, and to be specific and to have the slide action title supported by the body.
Appreciate the feedback, thanks for taking the time to write it out!
@@DanGalletta I truly appreciate your response. Keep doing your stuff man!