> From: Ben Tilly [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 11:59 AM
> It appears that you didn't read what I wrote, then launched a rant > that would be better aimed at someone else.I say this because I had > linked to a chapter on how to effectively communicate with PPT, then > complained about the way that it is used. > > This should tell you that I'm blaming the technique, not the tool. Your statement "Powerpoint ... encourages oversimplification" expressly blames the tool for the problem, even though your intent may have been otherwise (seems like another poster interpreted your comment the same way). Since it seems like we're both on the same page about communicating ideas, we can move on. BTW, I do take issue with describing my response as a "rant", which seems to be often misused on the web: Rant Meaning and Definition 1. (n.) High-sounding language, without importance or dignity of thought; boisterous, empty declamation; bombast; as, the rant of fanatics. 2. (v. i.) To rave in violent, high-sounding, or extravagant language, without dignity of thought; to be noisy, boisterous, and bombastic in talk or declamation; as, a ranting preacher. I would hardly qualify my last response as "without importance or dignity of thought; boisterous, empty declamation". A lot of thought went into to specifically addressing your comments. I did read your linked article & found it in conflict with your statement. A response does not qualify as a "rant" just because it is long and its intended target doesn't like its message. But, then again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion :-) > If you read the article that I linked to you'd have had this point > reinforced. There are widespread misconceptions about cognition, > which cause systemic misuse of the tool. Couldn't agree more! > As an individual within a company, absolutely. But for the company > it is a different story. The way that companies often work is that ... > Though I would highly encourage any employee of a > company with that kind of culture to do the best presentations that > you can, because it is necessary for personal success. And there is > *no* question that being able to sell well is valuable when dealing > with other companies. There are many ways that companies can & do conduct their internal businesses. Why they do what they do and how they do it and whether it is optimal or not, is specific and subjective for each company. It is a totally separate discussion for another day. The fact remains that companies have a resistance to change or new ideas. Whether that is good or bad is very context specific for each company & each issue. Given that, properly communicating ideas to *internal* audiences remains critical at all companies, whether that is productive or not. > As a former mathematician I distrust giving people the illusion of > comprehension without the substance. While animations can indeed > illuminate, they can just as easily - and more often do - mislead > people into thinking they understand what they don't. > > I have also found that the more complex the idea, the more > important it is to work through it interactively rather than > hoping that the right presentation will be received correctly. > A prepackaged presentation does not replace a whiteboard. Absolutely! A "presentation", even a very good one, can never be an end in itself and can rarely stand on its own. It has to be accompanied by an articulate speaker to convey it with the proper context (which can be rarely captured adequately within the presentation) to the, & depending on the, audience. > > Moral of the story: it's the people, not the tools! > As should be clear, we never disagreed on that. Amen! -Nilanjan _______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list [email protected] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
