Skip to main content

Part XI

PART XI: Building the Deck

A strong deck is not built by starting at Slide 1 and working forward. It is built by making a series of communication decisions in the right order. The goal is to move from:

CASE → MESSAGE → STORY → EVIDENCE → SLIDES → DELIVERY

This part brings together the earlier chapters into a practical deck-building process.

Two ideas matter most:

  1. Build the logic before the slides.

  2. Audit every slide before it earns a place in the final deck.

PowerPoint should be one of the last tools you open, not the first.

Chapter 21: The Recommended Deck-Building Process

Case teams often build presentations in slide order.

  • They start with the title slide.
  • Then the situation.
  • Then analysis.
  • Then alternatives.
  • Then recommendation.

That sounds logical, but it can create a problem: the team begins producing slides before it knows exactly what the argument needs to be. A stronger process builds the communication architecture first, then turns that architecture into slides. Use the following process as a guide. Adapt it to the timing, rules, and characteristics of the competition.

Step 1: Decipher

Understand the case and communication challenge. Before building anything, establish:

  • who the audience is;

  • what decision they need to make;

  • what the central problem is;

  • what they care about;

  • how much time you have;

  • what evidence will matter most.

Ask: What kind of presentation does this case require? This keeps you from defaulting to a memorised template.

Step 2: Define the Core Message

What do we want the judges to believe?

  • Complete: At the end of this presentation, we want the judges to believe that __________.
  • For example: Customer retention—not acquisition—is the primary driver of declining profitability, and a targeted loyalty strategy is the most attractive response.

That core message becomes the centre of the deck.

Step 3: Build the Story

Create the logical sequence.

  • Use the communication structures introduced earlier: SITUATION → COMPLICATION → QUESTION → ANSWER.
  • Then: PROOF → EXECUTION → IMPACT
  • Or simplify it to: PROBLEM → INSIGHT → DECISION → ACTION → VALUE

The exact sequence may change. The important point is that each section should create the need for the next.

Step 4: Storyboard

Write one sentence for every slide. Do not design yet. Write the takeaway. For example:

  1. High-value customer churn is driving the profitability decline.

  2. The decline is caused by deteriorating customer experiences.

  3. Retention offers greater economic value than additional acquisition.

  4. Three credible strategic alternatives exist.

  5. The targeted loyalty strategy provides the strongest fit.

  6. The strategy generates positive value under all three scenarios.

  7. A pilot-first approach limits execution risk.

  8. This strategy restores profitable growth.

Read the titles in sequence. Do they tell the story? If not, fix the story before building slides.

Step 5: Identify the Evidence

What proves each message? For every storyboard sentence, ask:

  • What fact supports it?

  • What analysis supports it?

  • What calculation supports it?

  • What research supports it?

  • What visual would make it easiest to understand?

For example:

  • Message
    • Retention offers greater economic value than additional acquisition.
  • Evidence
    • customer lifetime value;
    • acquisition cost;
    • churn rate;
    • incremental contribution.

Now the slide has a reason to exist.

Step 6: Build the Slides

Now open PowerPoint. Only after the:

  • audience;

  • core message;

  • story;

  • slide messages;

  • evidence

are clear should the team begin visual production. This makes slide building much faster because you already know what the slide needs to accomplish. The question changes from “What can we put here?” to “What is the clearest way to communicate this message?”

Build in Parallel but Integrate First

Competition time may require several teammates to build slides simultaneously. That is fine. But divide the work after the team agrees on:

  • the storyboard;

  • recommendation wording;

  • key terminology;

  • anchor numbers;

  • visual conventions.

Otherwise, parallel work can create four different decks that need to be stitched together later.

  • Think: ALIGN → DIVIDE → BUILD → REINTEGRATE
  • Not: DIVIDE → BUILD → DISCOVER WE DISAGREE
Step 7: Edit

Remove anything that doesn't earn its place. This may be the most important step. Ask:

  • Do we need this slide?

  • Do we need this chart?

  • Do we need this bullet?

  • Do we need this number?

  • Does this evidence change the decision?

  • Could this live in Q&A instead?

Remember: The deck becomes stronger not only through what you add, but through what you remove.

Edit for Time Before Speaking Faster

If the presentation is too long, do not tell everyone to speak faster. Return to the deck. Ask: Which content is least important to the argument?

Cut:

  • repeated explanations;

  • low-value background;

  • unnecessary analysis;

  • secondary numbers;

  • redundant visuals.

Protect:

  • the problem;

  • key insights;

  • recommendation;

  • proof;

  • implementation;

  • impact.

Step 8: Practice

Deliver the presentation. Time may not always allow a full rehearsal during competition, but practise as much as circumstances permit. Practice reveals problems that PowerPoint cannot. You may discover:

  • a slide takes too long to explain;

  • a transition feels unnatural;

  • the financial story is unclear;

  • two slides repeat the same idea;

  • a chart is hard to interpret while speaking;

  • the conclusion arrives too late.

The deck may look finished and still not be presentable.

Step 9: Test

Have someone unfamiliar with the case watch it. When competition rules and time allow, this is one of the best tests available. Do not explain anything beforehand. Then ask:

  • What was the problem?

  • What did we recommend?

  • Why did we recommend it?

  • What evidence was most convincing?

  • Where did you get lost?

  • What do you still not believe?

Do not ask only: “Did you like it?” You are testing understanding, not popularity.

Step 10: Refine

Fix where the audience gets lost. Use feedback to improve:

  • story;

  • slide order;

  • wording;

  • visual hierarchy;

  • speaking;

  • transitions;

  • timing.

Then test again where possible. Deck building is iterative:

BUILD → DELIVER → OBSERVE → ADJUST

The deck is not finished because the slides exist. It is finished when they communicate effectively.

Put together, the process becomes:

  1. DECIPHER What does this communication challenge require?
  2. CORE MESSAGE What must the judges believe?
  3. STORY What sequence makes that logic clear?
  4. STORYBOARD What is the message of every slide?
  5. EVIDENCE What proves each message?
  6. BUILD What visual communicates it best?
  7. EDIT What can we remove?
  8. PRACTICE Can we deliver it?
  9. TEST Can someone else follow it?
  10. REFINE Where do we need to improve?

That is a far stronger process than: Open PowerPoint → Start making slides.

Discover Your Mad Skills Principle

Build the presentation in thinking order—not slide order.

The slides are the output. The thinking comes first.

The Bottom Line

A strong deck is built through:

DECIPHER → MESSAGE → STORY → STORYBOARD → EVIDENCE → BUILD → EDIT → PRACTICE → TEST → REFINE

Adapt the process when time or competition rules require it. But preserve the logic: Know what you are trying to communicate before deciding how it should look.

Chapter 22: The Slide Audit

Once the deck is built, every slide should be challenged.

  • Not: “Does this slide look good?”
  • But: “Is this slide doing its job?”

A strong slide should be able to answer six questions.

1. MESSAGE

What is the one thing the judge should remember? This is the slide's reason for existing. For example: High-value customers account for most of the lost profit. If you cannot state the message in one sentence, the slide may be trying to communicate too much.

2. EVIDENCE

What proves it? The slide should contain enough evidence to support the message. Depending on the slide, that might include:

  • a chart;

  • financial calculation;

  • case fact;

  • research;

  • customer data;

  • competitor comparison.

Ask: If the judge challenged this headline, could we point to evidence on the slide? If not, the message may be unsupported.

3. VISUAL

Is this the clearest way to show the evidence? A table may contain the correct information but still be difficult to interpret.Ask:

  • Would a chart work better?

  • Would a timeline be clearer?

  • Would a single number be enough?

  • Could we simplify the table?

  • Do we even need a visual?

The right question remains: What do we want the audience to see?

4. IMPLICATION

Why does it matter? Do not leave the audience with: “Interesting.” Leave them with: “Therefore…” For example:

  • Evidence
    • High-value customers are churning at twice the average rate.
  • Implication
    • Retention should be prioritised over broad-based acquisition.

The implication connects the analysis to the decision.

5. SPEAKER

What will I say that isn't already written on the slide? The speaker should add:

  • interpretation;

  • emphasis;

  • context;

  • meaning;

  • connection.

If the answer is: “I'm going to read the bullets,” the slide or speaking approach needs work. Return to:

SLIDE = WHAT
SPEAKER = SO WHAT

6. TRANSITION

Why are we going to the next slide? Every slide should create the need for what follows. For example: “Now that we've established that retention is the core problem, the next question is which strategy provides the strongest response.” That transition leads naturally into alternatives. The transition test reveals whether the deck is truly a story.

The Six-Part Slide Audit

For every slide, complete:

Audit Question
Message What should the judge remember?
Evidence What proves it?
Visual Is this the clearest way to show it?
Implication Why does it matter?
Speaker What meaning will I add?
Transition Why does the next slide follow?

If you cannot answer one of those questions, the slide probably needs more work.

Add the Necessity Question

I would add one final question to your original audit:

  • NECESSITY
    • What happens if we delete this slide?

If nothing important is lost, why is it there? This turns the six-part audit into an even stronger final test:

MESSAGE → EVIDENCE → VISUAL → IMPLICATION → SPEAKER → TRANSITION → NECESSITY

Audit the Slide in Context

A slide can be strong individually and still weaken the deck. Perhaps:

  • it repeats the previous slide;

  • it interrupts the story;

  • it appears too late;

  • the evidence belongs somewhere else.

Therefore, do not audit slides only one by one. Also ask: Does this slide belong here? Deck architecture matters as much as slide quality.

Audit the Headlines Together

Remove all slide content. Read only the titles. They should form a logical argument. For example:

  • Customer churn is driving the decline in profitability.
  • High-value customers account for most of the lost value.
  • Customer experience is the primary driver of churn.
  • Retention creates greater value than additional acquisition.
  • A targeted loyalty strategy provides the strongest response.

That is a story. If your titles read:

  • Customer Analysis
  • SWOT
  • Alternatives
  • Financials
  • Implementation

you have categories. Not an argument.

Audit for Consistency

The slide audit should also look across the deck for:

  • consistent terminology;

  • consistent recommendation wording;

  • consistent financial numbers;

  • consistent fonts;

  • consistent chart treatment;

  • consistent phases;

  • consistent risk language.

The judge should not have to wonder whether Customer Segment A and Premium Customer refer to the same group. Consistency protects clarity.

Audit for Time

Ask how long each slide actually takes to communicate. A slide may be visually simple but require 90 seconds of explanation. Another may need only 15 seconds. Do not assume: 10 slides = one minute each. Time should reflect the importance and complexity of the message.

The Three-Pass Slide Audit

A useful final workflow is to audit the deck three times.

  • Pass 1 Logic
    • Ask:

    • Does every slide have a message?

    • Does the story flow?

    • Does the recommendation emerge logically?

  • Pass 2 Visual
    • Ask:

    • Is the important information obvious?

    • Can the slide be understood quickly?

    • Is anything cluttered or unreadable?

  • Pass 3 Delivery
    • Ask:

    • What does the speaker add?

    • Are transitions natural?

    • Can we communicate within the time available?

Each pass looks at the deck through a different lens.

Discover Your Mad Skills Principle

Every slide needs a job. Every element on the slide needs a reason.

If you cannot explain the job, reconsider the slide. If you cannot explain the reason, reconsider the element.

The Bottom Line

Audit every slide through:

MESSAGE → EVIDENCE → VISUAL → IMPLICATION → SPEAKER → TRANSITION → NECESSITY

A slide is ready when:

  • its purpose is clear;

  • its evidence is credible;

  • its visual is easy to understand;

  • its implication matters;

  • the speaker adds value;

  • it advances the story;

  • and removing it would weaken the argument.

That is when the slide has earned its place.

Part XI: Practice Before Moving On

For this part, I would finish with a Deck War Room Audit. Put the entire presentation into slide sorter view or print the slides as thumbnails. Then review the whole deck as a team. For every slide, write one sentence answering: The judge needs this slide because __________. If the team cannot complete the sentence, flag the slide. Then classify each flagged slide:

  • KEEP it is necessary but needs improvement. 
  • MOVE it belongs somewhere else in the story.
  • APPENDIX useful for Q&A but not essential to the argument.
  • DELETE it does not earn presentation time.

Finally, run the headline-only test: Read every slide title aloud from beginning to end. The judges should be able to hear the complete argument: PROBLEM → IN SIGHT → CHOICE → RECOMMENDATION → PROOF → EXECUTION → IMPACT. If that story works before anyone presents a single chart, the deck architecture is doing its job.

Back to top