dispatches from the new world of work

Getting on the Same Page

Yesterday I participated in a meeting at a client's office where six people sat in a small conference room reviewing the contents of a PowerPoint presentation they are to deliver in a few days, and it struck me how exactly alike are PowerPoint and Wikipedia, the grassroots encyclopedia that anyone can contribute to. Well, they're alike at least in this one regard: Having to work together on a single page forces people to override their personal interests in favor of their shared values. At Wikipedia, that value is achieving a neutral point of view. At the business meeting, it was clarity and persuasiveness.

Of course, at the in-person meeting, the social structure inevitably gets in the way: The junior person doesn't push too hard and the senior person doesn't have to. I wonder how different the PowerPoints would have turned out if they'd been created in an environment where anyone in the group could comment on them or edit them anonymously.

David Weinberger posted this on 04/08/05.

Comments

Interesting post David - I use powerpoint regularly like all good management consultants

BUT recently I did an entire two hour workshop without one powerpoint slide - it was wonderful!!

I felt good and asked the delegates how many of them had been to a workshop in the last two years that didn't have a powerpoint presentation - not one hand went up!!

The delegates loved it too - we all felt it was a throw back to the past but that it worked brilliantly!!

Food for thought aye?

It confirmed my view we have all become far too reliant of Powerpoint! - JUST TELL 'EM A STORY FOR GOD SAKE!

You don't need Powerpoint to make your point - say it from the heart instead.

Trevor

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 8, 2005 8:32 AM

I'm not going to address Wikipedia or PowerPoint as I think the issue is bigger than the presentation software source. In my opinion, the goal should be a corporate culture at that company that would allow for honest input from each of those six people so that social structure doesn't get in the way of good input.

Posted by Tony May / Mayday Media at April 8, 2005 9:47 AM

Group discussions of PowerPoints don't seem to be any different from other discussions around a task. The power structure of participants gets in the way of getting the best outcome unless there are tools that enable the group to work as a group in what Michael Schrage calls "shared space". I have been seriuosly thinking of Powerpoint as a shared space with the audience in order to get to an actionable outcome. Cliff Atkinson has some interesting examples of Powerpoint makeovers in discussion group form. take a look at Beyondbullets.com and see if this supports the original hypothesis (ah Tom's Boyd or OODA loops showing!)

Posted by Jim Rait at April 8, 2005 10:52 AM

Interesting points all. One thing that this discussion remended me of was an experience I learned from military service. In staff meetings, the CO would ask input from the most junior officer present first, then move her/his way up the rank ladder. The idea was to avoid as much "intimidation by position" as possible. Worked pretty well, too.

Best regards,

-SPD

Posted by Steve Duprey at April 8, 2005 11:17 AM

Very interesting and endless topic also.
Given we live in a world where job security dicreases everyday I would like to see how many have the guts to disagree with the manager's ideas during a presentation. I see it rather improbable because in most cases there is not parachute in the unfortunate case that the manager is an idiot.

Posted by Omara at April 8, 2005 1:30 PM

David - the "power structure" can be damn efficient/effective though too. It cuts to the chase, rewards those who deserve it, saves time and money.

Example - as a parent I lead, dominate-love, coach and worship my kids. I'm their tough love "power structure" best friend and leader. On important issues they MUST follow my lead. It works - they are outstanding, incredible kids - miraculous!

Posted by Sean at April 8, 2005 1:36 PM

Sean, did you mention LOVE? well, that's why!
In business instead people try to be emotionally detached, example: if somebody is to be fired I am not going to be affected, pure survival measures. And I dont think employees, as it would be desirable, are moved by love: they are moved by FEAR.

Posted by Omara at April 8, 2005 1:49 PM

Omara - [tough] love prevails my friend - as Tom might say ..."it is all PERSONAL - not business ..."

Posted by Sean at April 8, 2005 6:36 PM

Sorry, I said employees were moved by fear, not managers and less CEOs, I know that in the management realm it is all personal...

Posted by Omara at April 8, 2005 7:20 PM

getting in the same page is alike to single page briefing documents. Play of the same sheet and the orchastration of events and decesions is possible. This is plan Common sense business wisdom.

David to answer your question:". I wonder how different the PowerPoints would have turned out if they'd been created in an environment where anyone in the group could comment on them or edit them anonymously.- I have not done this with PPT -but yes, with an EXCEL book thrown into shared folder... Theres a lot of collobarative synergies which can be leveraged in that mode.

Posted by /pd at April 9, 2005 9:11 PM

Except, pd, a one-page briefing doc requires everyone to act as if they believe it, whereas everyone working on the same set of Powerpoints (or Excel worksheets) can get people actually to agree. Or am I missing your point about the briefing doc?

Posted by David Weinberger at April 10, 2005 9:12 AM

buy viagra in nyc Yes, your correct David. And Nope, I think you got the point :)- Single PAge Brief Documents are drive the particpants into a sandbox. Collobrative PPT/Excel permits everyone to expand the sandbox.

Posted by /pd at April 12, 2005 1:48 PM