Skip to main content

Chapter 2: The Problem Isn't Time - It's Focus

Chapter 2: The Problem Isn't Time - It's Focus

Case competitions create a powerful temptation: "We only have ten minutes. We need to get everything in." That is usually the wrong way to think about the problem. Your constraint is not simply time. Your constraint is attention. A ten-minute presentation technically gives you 600 seconds. That doesn't mean the audience can absorb 600 seconds of continuous information. During those ten minutes, the judges are simultaneously trying to:

  • listen to your speakers;

  • read your slides;

  • interpret charts;

  • remember numbers;

  • understand your analysis;

  • compare alternatives;

  • evaluate assumptions;

  • follow your logic;

  • assess implementation;

  • identify potential risks;

  • decide whether they believe your recommendation.

Their attention is a scarce resource. Treat it that way.

The Attention Budget

Think of every presentation as having an attention budget.

  • Every new idea spends some of that budget.
  • Every chart spends some.
  • Every number spends some.
  • Every transition spends some.
  • Every complicated slide spends a lot.

Your goal is therefore not "How much information can we fit into the presentation?" It is how much understanding can we create with the attention available to us? That is a fundamentally different objective. And it leads directly to one of the most important principles in case presentation: Less is more but only when you choose the right "less." Removing information indiscriminately doesn't create clarity. Prioritising the information that matters most does.

Strategy Is Deciding What Not to Do

Strategic thinking requires choices.

  • You cannot pursue every customer.
  • You cannot enter every market.
  • You cannot invest in every initiative.
  • You cannot communicate everything your team discovered.

The same discipline used to develop strategy should therefore be used to build the presentation.

  • Every slide creates a demand on the audience.
  • Every chart requires interpretation.
  • Every bullet requires reading.
  • Every new idea creates another thing the judges must remember.

Every piece of information you include should earn its place. If something doesn't help the judges understand:

  • the problem;

  • the insight;

  • the decision;

  • the recommendation;

  • the evidence;

  • the impact;

  • the implementation;

  • the risk;

ask whether it belongs in the main presentation.

Must Know, Useful to Know, Nice to Know

One way to make this decision is to classify information into three categories.

  • Must Know
    • The judges need this information to understand or believe the recommendation.
    • It belongs in the presentation.
  • Useful to Know
    • The information strengthens the argument but is not essential to understanding it.
    • It may belong in the presentation, the appendix, or Q&A preparation, depending on the case and the time available.
  • Nice to Know
    • The information is interesting but doesn't materially change the decision.
    • Leave it out.

This is often difficult for teams because they become emotionally attached to their analysis. Someone spent twenty minutes building the chart.

  • Someone found an interesting statistic.
  • Someone created a framework.

None of those is a reason to include anything in the presentation. Ask instead whether the audience needs this to make the decision.

The Three Destinations for Your Analysis

Not everything you analyse needs to disappear. Your work generally has three possible destinations:

Destination Purpose
Main Presentation Information necessary to understand and believe the recommendation
Appendix / Q&A Preparation Supporting evidence that may become useful if challenged
Leave It Out Analysis that helped the team think but doesn't help the audience decide

The third category is important. Some analysis exists to help you think, not to help the judges understand. That analysis has already served its purpose. It doesn't need a slide.

The Attention Test

For every slide, ask what's the ONE thing the judges need to take away from this slide.

  • Not three things.
  • Not five.
  • One.

If your team cannot answer that question in a single sentence, the slide probably needs work. For example:

  • Weak answer: This is our customer analysis. That describes the slide. It doesn't identify the takeaway.
  • Stronger answer: Our highest-value customers are leaving because the current experience no longer meets their expectations. Now the team knows exactly what the slide must communicate.

The charts, numbers, labels, title, and speaker commentary can all be designed around that message.

The Removal Test

Another useful question is if we remove this slide, does our argument become weaker?

  • If the answer is yes, the slide probably matters.
  • If the answer is no, ask why it is there.

This doesn't mean every slide needs to prove the recommendation directly. Some slides provide context, transition between ideas, establish urgency, or explain implementation. Every slide should have a job; if you cannot identify that job, reconsider the slide.

Don't Confuse Complexity With Sophistication

Teams sometimes worry that simplifying the presentation will make their solution appear less sophisticated. Usually, the opposite is true. 

  • Making something complicated is easy.
  • Making something complicated understandable requires mastery.

Executive communication depends on identifying what matters, removing what doesn't, and communicating the remaining ideas clearly. The judges don't need to see every step of your thinking to recognise that sophisticated thinking occurred. They need to see the result of your thinking.

Give Q&A Something to Work With

There is another strategic benefit to not presenting everything. You don't need to answer every possible question before the judges ask it. Some secondary analysis can deliberately remain available for Q&A. If judges ask:  "Did you consider the impact on employees?" and your team has analysed that issue, you now have an opportunity to demonstrate depth beyond the presentation. The main presentation establishes the argument. Q&A allows the judges to explore it. Trying to anticipate and answer every possible question inside the presentation often creates the very information overload you are trying to avoid.

The 10-Minute Test

Imagine you suddenly lose two minutes from your presentation.

  • What would you remove?
  • Now imagine you lose another two.
  • What goes next?
  • Keep going until only the most essential elements remain.
  • What survives?

Those are probably the ideas at the heart of your presentation. This exercise forces the team to distinguish between what is interesting and what is essential.

The Bottom Line

  • The goal is not to fit more into the presentation.
  • The goal is to make what matters impossible to miss.

The strongest teams don't overwhelm judges with everything they know. They decide what matters. They make it clear. And they trust their analysis enough to leave the rest behind.

MAD Skills Drill

Before moving to Part II, your team should be able to answer four questions without opening PowerPoint:

  • What is the central argument of our presentation?
    • Complete: We believe __________ because __________, and therefore the organisation should __________.
  • What must the judges understand?
    • Identify the three most important ideas they need to remember after the presentation.
  • What must the judges believe?
    • Complete: For the judges to support our recommendation, they must believe that __________.
  • What can we leave out?
    • Identify at least three pieces of analysis that were useful during case solving but don't need to appear in the main presentation.

If the team can answer these questions clearly, it is ready to start thinking about the communication challenge; if it cannot, don't open PowerPoint yet.

Back to top