Simon Morton’s career as an executive for a technology company exposed him to more PowerPoint than was good for him. In 2004 Simon founded Eyeful Presentations with two aims; ridding the world of ‘Death by PowerPoint’ and enjoying a relaxing, family future. Unfortunately for Simon (but great for businesses everywhere), his design and storytelling skills made a real impact. Ten years, two children, thousands of satisfied customers and six international offices later, it’s going rather well (if not exactly to plan on the relaxation front).
In this conversation, Simon discusses his new book, The Presentation Lab.
Geetesh: Your book, The Presentation Lab has quite a few home truths that will help others create better slides – but you did weave all these truths through an analogy of fiction in a believable laboratory. Tell us more about what motivated this analogy?
Simon: It all started by recognizing that powerful presentations work due to a number of elements come together in harmony. A strong story becomes more powerful and engaging when mixed with the appropriate visuals and delivered in a way that engages an audience. Similarly great visuals are nothing without a coherent message delivered through an engaging structure. We’ve all seen potentially great presentations fail because the elements (understanding the audience, strong message, engaging structure, valuable visuals, and presentation tools) were not working together – the book is designed to address this head-on.
The laboratory analogy was a natural next step as there are so many parallels to presentations – the need for careful planning, precision when mixing all the elements together and the fact that to achieve a great result, you need to put the hours in to get it ready for release! Ongoing testing, tweaking and enhancing your ‘formula’, be that as a presenter or lab scientist, is also key to success for both presenters and lab technicians.
Geetesh: What I really loved about the book is that I could just open it anywhere and read one of the small sections – and in fact learn something without having to read the entire book to understand what I just read. Tell us more about this approach.
Simon: That’s lovely to hear! As a self-confessed presentation geek, I’m a voracious reader of presentation, storytelling and design books but even with my passion of the subject, I find some of them a little too dense and overly complex to be of much use in my day-to-day work. When planning the book, we had a very specific reader in mind – someone who needs to deliver powerful presentations as part of their role (possibly internal communications or as part of a sales cycle) and wants to improve the impact and results from these engagements. As such, taking lessons from the great orators of our time (Dr Martin Luther King, Steve Jobs, TED Talks) is inspirational but unlikely to provide them with ideas and approaches they could use immediately to improve the impact of their next presentation. Equally we wanted to bust some of the 'quick fix’ myths that have been built around certain presentation techniques courtesy of well-meaning but often misleading articles and blog posts.
The net result was creating a book that people could not only dip into to address particular issues but also equip themselves with practical tools to get them on the right track. Techniques like the ‘audience heat maps’ and ‘presentation landscape wheel’ all help ensure the ‘presentation formula’ is correctly balanced and focused on the audience. For me, the measure of a great book is that is ends up covered in scribbled notes, post–it notes and highlighted sections – I hope the content and structure of The Presentation Lab means that it will become a scruffy but indispensable addition to many business presenters’ bookshelves!
Categories: books, interviews, opinion, powerpoint
April 2003 | May 2003 | December 2003 | January 2004 | February 2004 | March 2004 | April 2004 | May 2004 | June 2004 | July 2004 | August 2004 | September 2004 | October 2004 | November 2004 | December 2004 | January 2005 | February 2005 | March 2005 | April 2005 | May 2005 | June 2005 | July 2005 | August 2005 | September 2005 | October 2005 | November 2005 | December 2005 | January 2006 | February 2006 | March 2006 | April 2006 | May 2006 | June 2006 | July 2006 | August 2006 | September 2006 | October 2006 | November 2006 | December 2006 | January 2007 | February 2007 | March 2007 | April 2007 | May 2007 | June 2007 | July 2007 | August 2007 | September 2007 | October 2007 | November 2007 | December 2007 | January 2008 | February 2008 | March 2008 | April 2008 | May 2008 | June 2008 | July 2008 | August 2008 | September 2008 | October 2008 | November 2008 | December 2008 | January 2009 | February 2009 | March 2009 | April 2009 | May 2009 | June 2009 | July 2009 | August 2009 | September 2009 | October 2009 | November 2009 | December 2009 | January 2010 | February 2010 | March 2010 | April 2010 | May 2010 | June 2010 | July 2010 | August 2010 | September 2010 | October 2010 | November 2010 | December 2010 | January 2011 | February 2011 | March 2011 | April 2011 | May 2011 | June 2011 | July 2011 | August 2011 | September 2011 | October 2011 | November 2011 | December 2011 | January 2012 | February 2012 | March 2012 | April 2012 | May 2012 | June 2012 | July 2012 | August 2012 | September 2012 | October 2012 | November 2012 | December 2012 | January 2013 | February 2013 | March 2013 | April 2013 | May 2013 | June 2013 | July 2013 | August 2013 | September 2013 | October 2013 | November 2013 | December 2013 | January 2014 | February 2014 | March 2014 | April 2014 | May 2014 | June 2014 | July 2014 | August 2014 | September 2014 | October 2014 | November 2014 | December 2014 | January 2015 | February 2015 | March 2015 | April 2015 | May 2015 | June 2015 | July 2015 | August 2015 | September 2015 | October 2015 | November 2015 | December 2015 | January 2016 | February 2016 | March 2016 | April 2016 | May 2016 | June 2016 | July 2016 | August 2016 | September 2016 | October 2016 | November 2016 | December 2016 | January 2017 |
Microsoft and the Office logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.