17 Jan 2005 | Robert Johnson said...

Tufte is right on here, and I love that he's making his next book about Beautiful Evidence and focusing on presentations, etc.

If it hasn't been read, his tretise on PowerPoint Presentations is a must-have for anyone who has ever given or sat through a PowerPoint presentation:

The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint by Edward Tufte.

Furthermore, reading his posted chapter in the Ask E.T. forum on bad presentations has some great details on why bullet points are useless.

Tufte's next book is going to be great -- it's been fascinating to see him post chapter after chapter to his Ask E.T. forum for public comment.

17 Jan 2005 | Jeff said...

Wow. I would be very annoyed at that kid, and can't imagine having that happen. I would go insane!

Imagine that kind of pressure.

17 Jan 2005 | said...

Few, if any outside a Tufte, think about information actually existing. Aparrently, information is whatever advances our own agenda, no matter how self-destructively limited or short sighted. Dare to introduce a new perspective or -- heaven forbid -- question an authority, and you are an anarcho-informationalist.

Dare to introduce truth to power and you are slapped down. This is how information technology is built. The assumptions about people which go into a Powerpoint, CMS, CRM or other system are not how people work. Politics, agendas, that information can be a synthesis of examining and defending core assumptions -- that's not how we build technology systems.

For Powerpoint to work, humans have to have the self-awareness of Zen masters and the logic of Vulcans. And -- news flash -- Vulcans are fictional.

17 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

The surgeon story makes me think of people like Andrew Weil who like to cite anecdotal evidence in support of herbal remedies and other "complementary" practices that have not yet been tested in any rigorous manner.

Sure, you can find hundreds or thousands of cases in which homeopathy, herbs, mediating, or prayer appear to have "cured" people, but you don't hear about the hundreds or thousands of cases where there was no effect. Without adequate controls and good experimental design you don't have any way of telling whether these remedies actually did something or whether it was just luck. And as the surgeon story also indicates, it's hard-to-impossible to set up proper control groups when you're dealing with humans.

17 Jan 2005 | One of several Steves said...

While Tufte has a lot of valuable things to say about presenting information effectively, he has an awful habit of blaming the medium rather than the people making the presentation.

Tools are, for the most part, inert. They are neither inherently good or bad, and it's the way that they're used that make them so.

It's not Powerpoint's fault that people stupidly read what's on the screen or rely on bad clip art and lousy "effects." Yeah, you can argue that Powerpoint enables bad behavior, but blaming Powerpoint for bad presentations is like blaming Ford for drunk driving.

It's the same with his blaming passive voice. The problem is not the use of passive verbs - passive construction is sometimes exactly what is called for. The problem is a commission that scrupulously avoided attributing direct responsibility for the events it was investigating. Passive language gave them the ability to do that, and that was the tool they used. Passive voice is not resulted in their failure to lay blame at anyone's feet.

17 Jan 2005 | One of several Steves said...

Ugh. Not sure how I botched that last sentence so badly. That should have said, "Passive voice did not cause their failure to lay blame at anyone's feet."

18 Jan 2005 | sloan said...

Hm. That's an interesting question I suppose... should Ford allow drunk driving in their vehicles? Or riding without headlights on at night? How much should be left to the user and how much of the thought load should the automobile take on?

Software design has been abysmal for quite some time. So much can be controled but isn't, and the tools don't educate on how to use them effectively. PowerPoint comes with templates that reinforce the bullets, and reading slides aloud, and all sorts of bad habits. So I would argue that a tool can be inherently bad, especially if it presents 50 tool buttons when you begin a new document. It shouldn't be difficult to access those options, but should it encourage using 50 different functions at once? I don't think letting the tool off the hook is the right answer, nor is blaming it completely, but if making a good presentation is more difficult because of the tool's design, then it should hold part of the responsibility.

Unfortunately, when feature requests are made, they are often not filtered by the developer to test for appropriateness. It too easily becomes part of the development process without inspection. Hence, feature creep and poor UI choices.

18 Jan 2005 | said...

This could be an interesting thread. Here's how....

1) "AutoContent was added in the mid-nineties, when Microsoft learned that some would-be presenters were uncomfortable with a blank PowerPoint page-it was hard to get started. "We said, 'What we need is some automatic content!'" a former Microsoft developer recalls, laughing. "'Punch the button and you'll have a presentation.'" The idea, he thought, was "crazy." And the name was meant as a joke. But Microsoft took the idea and kept the name-a rare example of a product named in outright mockery of its target customers." -- Absolute Powerpoint.

Okay, you create templates and features designed to replace thinking, attracting people who don't like to think. This becomes the customer base.

2. Due to the follow-the-customer iterative mode, feedback produces iteraction, which in turn creates a better product for people who don't want to think. Simplicity overules forming a complete thought as "if you can't say it in seven words, it must not be worth saying." The masters of the quick fix, the hype, the tagline as marketing plan grasp this new tool.

The maker of hammers attracts those who like to view every problem as a nail. Technology does not drop from the sky. It is built by people, for people. Tools may be inert, but they are the shape of the thoughts and conversations whiche take place between developer and customers. And tools are also the result of the conversations which don't take place.

Why not point to a set of templates which promote the good communication habits Tufte advocates? Have you seen any? Any alternatives to Powerpoint which promotes an alternative approach to the presentation? (Well, point to it)

18 Jan 2005 | brian said...

"It's not Powerpoint's fault that people stupidly read what's on the screen or rely on bad clip art and lousy "effects." Yeah, you can argue that Powerpoint enables bad behavior, but blaming Powerpoint for bad presentations is like blaming Ford for drunk driving."

That's exactly what I've been saying to my colleagues who worship Tufte. I'm no Microsoft fan and certainly don't like powerpoint, but like you said, it's just a tool.

I don't hear anyone blaming Photoshop or Illustrator for the vast amount of bad design out in the world.

18 Jan 2005 | said...

"I don't hear anyone blaming Photoshop or Illustrator for the vast amount of bad design out in the world."

You do hear that a bit with Flash.

19 Jan 2005 | Jake Walker said...

From what I remember about my two Tufte seminars (I'd go again), rather than using PowerPoint or Keynote as an outline, hand out a piece of paper... use Keynote or PowerPoint when you need to show a picture, but not as a presentation outline.

Unlike Photoshop or Illustrator, there simply isn't enough space on a PowerPoint slide for words (or even meaningful graphs). You just can't get coherent thoughts into bullet points.

Tufte always points to this sarcastic version of the Gettysburg Address.

Here are Tufte's notes on presentations:

(1) Show up early; good things often happen
(2) What is the problem? Who cares? What is your solution? Never apologize.... how far can you go without using the first person singular?
(3) PGP - Particular, General, Particular
(4) No matter what - give one piece of paper. It's the highest possible resolution.. It takes and gives responsibility. It's permanance creates credability.
(5) Think about what your audience reads.
(6) Avoid overheads/powerpoints.
(7) No such thing as KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid). The people in the audience are your collegues; they care as much as you and are as smart as you
(8) Humor - helpful, changse pace
(9) Don't use masculane pronouns as default
(10) If you believe something, make sure the audience knows it
(11) Finish early - the audience will be thrilled, amazed & delighted
(12) Practice, practice, practice; rehersal improves performace.
(13) GET BETTER CONTENT! Content always comes first.

And on lessons from the Challenger presentation (applicable to all important presentations):

Questions to ask/demands to make for serious decision

(1) Show me causality (if...then)
(2) Show me all relevant data
(3) What do i REALLY need to see? Escape from the presentation in front of you.