←back to thread

210 points scapecast | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.26s | source
Show context
bigstrat2003 ◴[] No.45059108[source]
I don't see how this has anything to do with PowerPoint. There wasn't clear communication; the medium was completely incidental to that. They could have been writing on a chalkboard and had a communication failure, does that mean that chalkboards should be blamed in that case?
replies(6): >>45059191 #>>45059348 #>>45059699 #>>45060601 #>>45061971 #>>45067121 #
stinkbeetle ◴[] No.45059191[source]
Because the medium is not conducive to dense amount of technical information that readers are expected to use to make or understand decisions. Other similar mediums like a chalkboard were not singled out because the problem was identified with PowerPoint specifically. And it wasn't a choice of mediums all with similar problems, but slides vs papers. From the article,

> “The Board views the endemic use of PowerPoint briefing slides instead of technical papers as an illustration of the problematic methods of technical communication at NASA.”

replies(3): >>45059219 #>>45060207 #>>45063329 #
breadwinner ◴[] No.45059219[source]
Would it be better if you sent them a PDF document instead? There seems to be an assumption here that if you send the stakeholders a larger volume of information they will take the time to read it. Is that a valid assumption?
replies(2): >>45059711 #>>45063610 #
1. mhh__ ◴[] No.45059711[source]
Memos and reports also ask the author to try to explain things clearly and at length, a PowerPoint, even a technical one is usually figures and bullet points

Jeff bezos iirc speaks at length about this.