KJT Group presented Slidedesignr with a challenge—how can they level up the strategic, consultative recommendations they’re making?

To demonstrate the gap between their current state, and what’s possible for them in the future, Slidedesignr was given an existing deck from a previous project that has already been presented to a medtech/healthcare client and asked to show how I would have approached it differently.

While the look and feel of the slides is cleaner, and that’s important for readability and clarity, what’s going on “under the hood” with these slides is what’s creating most of the impact.

Clean, clear design, and deeper more consultative insights and recommendations—that hadn’t been presented—emerged after simplifying the structure of the entire deck, creating a visual framework, organizing insights into that framework, ruthlessly removing redundancies, and writing clearer, more direct copy.

The visual model for scenarios testing was developed using the Insights Accelerator process. Previously, scenarios were organized by Key Consideration, which was correct, but they were confusing the audience by lumping together different scenarios happening across wide stretches of time—several years, in all cases.

What’s more, in each scenario, brand and competitor products were methodically added and removed in each scenario tested, but without showing those steps to the audience, they were making mental comparison between scenarios nearly impossible. In the original deck, the three SmartArt arrows appeared to show that only three scenarios were tested when there were actually five.

By presenting the model with Key Scenarios as the Y axis, and time—as it is universally understood—as the X axis, the visual framework is essentially a table. Each “cell” shows clearly which products were being methodically added or removed at each step. These cells were then used as headings and breadcrumbs throughout the deck to guide the viewer logically through each scenario across time, making it much clearer which 4 Strategic Moves the client should make to strengthen their position and protect share.

What information does the audience really want to see? They’re wondering what share of preference is for what product lineup, offered at what price.

The table at the bottom was hiding that key information among multiple cells containing redundant information, all in a small font size. What’s more, it was taking up 1/3 of the slide layout, drawing the audience’s attention to something that was too difficult to read.

Reorganizing that information around what matters to the audience, reanalyzing the data, and rethinking the copy using the Insights Accelerator method created space to talk about some key insights that hadn’t been expressed in the previous version–namely about the risk of cannibalization.

I took a similar approach here. This time, preference share and revenue comparison across the lineup and against the competitor were the most important information to elevate.

Further, the audience’s need to compare to the base case was brought back onto this slide– otherwise, they would have had to turn back several slides to find this information.

The risk of cost-cutting wasn’t mentioned in the client’s draft; that new and important finding was added here for context.

This slide is heavily redacted, but here’s what should come through: Reanalyzing the data and connecting it to the actions the C-Suite needs to take going forward moved this all-important slide from “Key Takeaways” as bullet points, which often were not mutually exclusive, into the clearly categorized 4 Key Strategic Moves for the product lineup. Telling the audience clearly what each move will do in no uncertain terms– Protect Share, Increase Share, Increase Revenue, Protect Share & Revenue–give them clear strategies that are easy to understand and prioritize, with clear tradeoffs.

As is always my goal, if the audience saw only this one slide, you could lead a consultative strategic conversation with them about potential next steps.