TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Your last line summed it up neatly:
clearly they need a method of supporting (not delivering) a live
presentation, which PPT(x) does well. But what about three months later?
If it were me, I'd use the PPT to convey the big issues and at most
list/mention the details and have a DOC that contained most of the actual
content. The PPT can contain links to headings in the DOC so that they can
easily dive deeper should they way to. The two would work closely together,
but put the bulk of things where they make the most sense.
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:48 AM, Chris Morton <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:
> I could use your expert input.
> I made my living (in part) from PowerPoint in the '90s, playing a key role
> in a traveling Great Oz show. The two companies for which I worked spent a
> great deal of time in researching what constitutes an effective
> presentation. This included such things as color schemes, typeface choices,
> font sizes, handout generationâyou name it.
> I've let my client know that their decks are abhorrent, supported by a
> weblink I sent them:
> I'd like to now advise the client, who writes:
> No doubt we are trying to convey a lot [read: WAY too much] of information
> in our slides. The deck I delivered last week was 180 slides based on the
> client's scope (our presentations range in size from 30 to 300 slides).
> Therein lies the problem: Our slide presentations are for myriad clients
> with different needs but the central requirement is that [they] convey
> information to readers beyond our verbal presentation.
> Decades ago, our reports were done exclusively in Word in a standard
> business report format (complete sentences and paragraphs, supported by
> charts, graphs and figures, with footnotes). We switched to PP at the
> request of clients, but the need for a lot of detail didn't go away. We
> tell a market story in complex specialty <*redacted*> markets, and people
> pass our slide decks onto their colleagues months later.
> Given our additional background, I am open to your suggestions for
> improvement to our process. Is it simply a matter of your revising our
> template, according to best industry practices for PP? Or should we
> rethink the way we are presenting?
> So... clearly they need a method of supporting (not delivering) a live
> presentation, which PPT(x) does well. But what about three months later?
> Record the presentations and offer them on disc (cloud)?
> Other suggestions?
> Chris Morton
> â Substantive Editing â Technical Writing â Proofreading
> â Marketing Expertise â Mentoring
> Click to
> Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and
> content development | http://techwhirl.com
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as vwritert -at- gmail -dot- com -dot-
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
>http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and
> Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online
> magazine at http://techwhirl.com
> Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public
> email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | http://techwhirl.com