Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • Way of the Quality Warrior
    • Critical Talks
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • AI & Predictive Maintenance
      • Asset Management in the Mining Industry
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • RCM Blitz®
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
      • The People Side of Maintenance
      • The Reliability Mindset
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinars
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Reliability Analysis Methods online course
    • Measurement System Assessment
    • SPC-Process Capability Course
    • Design of Experiments
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Quality during Design Journey
    • Reliability Engineering Statistics
    • Quality Engineering Statistics
    • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
    • Process Capability Analysis course
    • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
    • Return on Investment online course
    • CRE Preparation Online Course
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home

by Dianna Deeney 2 Comments

QDD 009 About Using Slide Decks for Technical Design Reviews

About Using Slide Decks for Technical Design Reviews

A danger of using slide decks for technical design reviews is loss of important technical information. In order to summarize something in a slide or slide deck, the presenter thins-out information without its raw data and divorces it from the plots, graphs, and other technical analyses.

Slide decks are useful to the presenter to pull together a meeting. Slide decks are terrible for the reviewers who need to review technical information and make decisions from it.

In this episode, I review some alternatives:

  • eliminating slide decks all together; use the technical report with executive summary and a 10 minute study hall at the top of the meeting
  • very sparse slide deck content, instead referencing the completed technical report
  • a report formatted with all the details like Nancy Duarte’s Slidedocs®, a hybrid between a technical document and a slide

 

View the Episode Transcript

Need an example of why slide decks are a bad idea for technical reviews? Check out Edward Tufte’s analysis of NASA’s Columbia incident and its use of PowerPoint slides to analyze and make decisions.

Tufte, Edward. “PowerPoint Does Rocket Science–and Better Techniques for Technical Reports.” www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0001yB&topic_id=1.

Once you’ve had a chance to listen, I want to hear from you. Share your answer in the comments section: Do you have any other suggestions for presenting data at a Design Review?

Citations

Check out these references for extra information. I mention all of these in the podcast.

Duarte, Nancy. “Slidedocs®.” www.duarte.com/slidedocs.

Tufte, Edward. “The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint: Pitching Out Corrupts Within.” Beautiful Evidence. Graphics Press, LLC, 2006. pp. 162-168.

Weiner, Jeff. “A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings.” LinkedIn, www.linkedin.com/pulse/20130701022638-22330283-a-simple-rule-to-eliminate-useless-meetings/.

 

Episode Transcript

You’re preparing for a design review and you have it all planned. You have your cross functional team scheduled, and the key players have accepted. You sent out your materials at least 24 hours ahead of time. Now it’s time for your meeting, so you power up the computer to present the slide deck. But hold on! Let’s pause this scenario. There’s another way to review data in a meeting. And it’s better. Listen in after this brief introduction.

Hello and welcome to Quality During Design the place to use quality thinking to create products, others love for less. My name is Dianna. I’m a senior level quality professional and engineer with over 20 years of experience in manufacturing and design. Listen in and then join the conversation at QualityDuringDesign.com.

I’ve conducted my fair share of design reviews and I’ve participated in even more. These are tough meetings enduring over long periods, and there’s usually difficult questions. And that’s okay! Big decisions are being made at these meetings, usually in the order of “do we move forward through the design process”. Here’s the thing: slide decks don’t work for technical meetings. And, let me clarify this statement: slide decks do work to make it easier for the presenter to put together meeting. Slide decks don’t work to effectively communicate technical information to reviewers.

I participated in lots of design reviews with slide decks and some of them I hosted. Here are some of the issues with using slide decks for technical design reviews.

  • Instead of presenting and showing the data with its information and conclusions all together, the slide deck sort-of tells a technical story and is summarized by the presenter. Usually, raw data is limited because of how slides are formatted and presented. You can’t really fit graphs, or if you do, they’re not really readable when they’re presented. And reviewers can’t study the graph closely.
  • Using slide decks also chops up the data so the reviewers don’t see the whole picture. For example, if questions come up during slide #2 that are answered in slide #4, what do you do? I’m guilty of saying, “Oh, hold on, we’ll cover that in slide #4.” I didn’t like saying that as the words tripped out of my mouth and neither did the reviewer. I mean, why keep them waiting? It just interrupts a chain of thought. It is frustrating for anyone having to make decisions during a technical design review.
  • We have to let go of the need to control the conversation and let discussions happen so good decisions can be made. It’s better to give up the power of controlling the flow of information. Let reviewers ask questions, challenge conclusions, evaluate options, and make the best decisions.

The presenter has to present the technical information adequately for the reviewers to be able to give a good review and slide decks impede this goal.

Do you know who else hates slide decks? Edward Tufte hates slide decks. He is a “data artist” or a “Galileo of graphics”. He pioneered the field of data visualization. He tries to bring awareness to how to present data so it’s factual, honest, scientific, without spin or persuasion. I attended a one-day seminar with Edward Tufte. As part of attending the conference, or seminar, we received four of his books. This seminar was hosted and presented by Edward Tufte himself. It was at a hotel conference center, so tables were lined up in long rows facing a podium and projector screen on the stage. On the screen was, “Our first 30 minutes is study hall. Please read *these* pages from *these* books.” So, that was a little weird and uncomfortable! Usually conferences are bustling with people, networking and making introductions with each other. Or, it’s high energy with slideshows to music. This was not that kind of a conference. When I walked into the room, everyone was really quiet, sitting, whispering…it was sort of like a library and they were treating it like a study hall. They had taken his books out of their covers and opened them to the pages and was studying and taking notes.

What he was doing is he was introducing us to this concept that he heard and liked [correction here, I think he was one of the original, big promoters for this methodology]. For technical meetings, have a dedicated time at the beginning of the meeting to read and review the information to be discussed. And when you present, your information is presented in full technical reports with an executive summary, purpose, test methods, raw data graphs, and a conclusion. The idea is that the technical report would be sent to reviewers ahead of time for their own independent review. And the time before the technical meeting would actually start would be treated like a study hall, where the reviewers would either finally get a chance to review that information or reacquaint themselves with what they had reviewed before.

The people making decisions in a design review: we don’t need to dumb it down for them. Provide an executive summary, but then also provide your report to read, pick apart and for them to ask questions until they are comfortable that they can come to an informed decision. This was sort of an epiphany for executives around 2013. Executives from Twitter, Amazon, and LinkedIn were all quoted or posted or interviewed about it. I copied the LinkedIn letter from Jeff Weiner and put it on the blog. But, Edward Tufte is who introduced me to it.

So, I tried it. I had a technical design review coming up. I told people what I was going to do, provided the materials for self-review at least 24 hours in advance (I think it was a couple days). We had the first 10 minutes of the meeting as a study hall. And, it was weird and uncomfortable! We were used to filing in, getting settled, dimming the lights, and staring at a wall. But it was good to present the information in its desired format: a technical report. And I think that discussion was more lively and there were more questions. I asked the team what they thought and they said, “Good,” and ran off to the next meeting.

Is conducting technical design reviews this way a culture shift? I think so. I think it’d be best if a project team decided that’s how they’re going to conduct design reviews and try it for an entire cycle. Now, if you really just can’t part ways from slides, Nancy Duarte is a communication expert and she proposes reorganizing typical technical reports into a report/slide hybrid. She calls it Slidedocs®. I’ll copy a link to her website in this podcast blog.

Do I run my technical meetings this way today without the typical PowerPoint slides? You bet. My clients don’t need me to dumb it down; they’re smart people. If presenting technical information, that technical report is the focus, not the slide deck. I need to gauge my audience, though. If there really has to be slides, I’ll go to extremes. I either go really minimalist or go all out, Slidedoc® style. I will use a projector for images if I think it would be helpful. Maybe I’ll schedule the meeting from 2:45 to 3:30 and give the first 15 minutes of study hall, but I’m transparent with what I’m doing and what it’s for.

What can you do with this today? If you’ve got a design review coming up, talk over this approach with your project manager or team and see if they want to try it. If they can’t bring themselves to ditch the slide deck altogether, then create your technical report, make it available to them at least 24 hours in advance, and speak to it from the meeting. Have your slide deck refer to the report. If someone’s got a question, don’t make them wait till later in the presentation. Dig into your technical report and have that discussion then and there. Your design review meeting minutes can attach or reference the technical report instead of the slide deck.

I have a question for you: do you have any other suggestions for presenting data at a design review? You can comment on this podcast blog at qualityduringdesign.com. Reach out to me on LinkedIn (I’m Dianna Deeney), or you can leave me a voicemail at 484-341-0238. I get all the messages and I might include yours in an upcoming episode. If you like this podcast or have a suggestion for an upcoming episode, let me know and share this podcast with your designing peers. This has been the production of Deeney Enterprises. Thanks for listening!

Filed Under: Quality during Design, The Reliability FM network

About Dianna Deeney

Dianna is a senior-level Quality Professional and an experienced engineer. She has worked over 20 years in product manufacturing and design and is active in learning about the latest techniques in business.

Dianna promotes strategic use of quality tools and techniques throughout the design process.

Comments

  1. John Bessman says

    June 20, 2021 at 8:53 PM

    This is really brilliant, and just at the right time for me – THANKS!

    Reply
    • Dianna Deeney says

      June 21, 2021 at 7:33 AM

      I’m glad the info is helpful! I think Edward Tufte’s analysis of NASA’s Columbia incident is interesting and telling, and a great cautionary tale, too. Good luck with your tech design reviews.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Quality during Design podcast logo

Tips for using quality tools and methods to help you design products others love, for less.


by Dianna Deeney
Quality during Design,
Hosted on Buzzsprout.com
Subscribe and enjoy every episode
Google
Apple
Spotify

Recent Episodes

QDD 128 Leveraging Proven Frameworks or Concept Development

QDD 127 Understanding Cross-Functional Collaboration

QDD 126 Exploring the Problem Space: A Key Principle for Robust Product Design and Project Success

QDD 125 Exploring Product Development and AI Through Literature

QDD 124 Design for User Tasks using an Urgent/Important Matrix

QDD 123 Information Development in Design, with Scott Abel – Part 2 (A Chat with Cross-Functional Experts)

QDD 122 Information Development in Design, with Scott Abel – Part 1 (A Chat with Cross-Functional Experts)

QDD 121 Crafting Effective Technical Documents for the Engineering Field

QDD 120 How to use FMEA for Complaint Investigation

QDD 119 Results-Driven Decisions, Faster: Accelerated Stress Testing as a Reliability Life Test

QDD 118 Journey from Production to Consumption: Enhancing Product Reliability

QDD 117 QDD Redux: Choose Reliability Goals for Modules

QDD 116 Reliability Engineering during Design, with Adam Bahret (A Chat with Cross-Functional Experts)

QDD 115 QDD Redux: 5 Options to Manage Risks during Product Engineering

QDD 114 The Instant Glory of Projects

QDD 113 What to do about Virtual Meetings

QDD 112 QDD Redux: How to self-advocate for more customer face time (and why it’s important)

QDD 111 Engineering with Receptivity, with Sol Rosenbaum (A Chat with Cross-Functional Experts)

QDD 110 Don’t Wish for Cross-Functional Buy-in on Product Designs – Plan to Get It!

QDD 109 Before You Start Engineering Solutions, Do This

QDD 108 QDD Redux Ep. 4: Statistical vs. Practical Significance

QDD 107 QDD Redux Ep. 3: When it’s Not Normal: How to Choose from a Library of Distributions

QDD 106 QDD Redux Ep. 2: How to Handle Competing Failure Modes

QDD 105 QDD Redux Ep. 1: How Many Do We Need to Test?

QDD 104 The Fundamental Thing to Know from Statistics for Design Engineering

QDD 103 What to do for Effective and Efficient Working Meetings

QDD 102 Get Design Inputs with Flowcharts

QDD 101 Quality Tools are Legos of Development (and Their 7 Uses)

QDD 100 Lessons Learned from Coffee Pod Stories

QDD 099 Crucial Conversations in Engineering, with Shere Tuckey (A Chat with Cross-Functional Experts)

QDD 098 Challenges Getting Team Input in Concept Development

QDD 097 Brainstorming within Design Sprints

QDD 096 After the ‘Storm: Compare and Prioritize Ideas

QDD 095 After the ‘Storm: Pareto Voting and Screening Methods

QDD 094 After the ‘Storm: Group and Explore Ideas

QDD 093 Product Design with Brainstorming, with Emily Haidemenos (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 092 Ways to Gather Ideas with a Team

QDD 091 The Spirits of Technical Writing Past, Present, and Future

QDD 090 The Gifts Others Bring

QDD 089 Next Steps after Surprising Test Results

QDD 088 Choose Reliability Goals for Modules

QDD 087 Start a System Architecture Diagram Early

QDD 086 Why Yield Quality in the Front-End of Product Development

QDD 085 Book Cast

QDD 084 Engineering in the Color Economy

QDD 083 Getting to Great Designs

QDD 082 Get Clarity on Goals with a Continuum

QDD 081 Variable Relationships: Correlation and Causation

QDD 080 Use Meetings to Add Productivity

QDD 079 Ways to Partner with Test Engineers

QDD 078 What do We do with FMEA Early in Design Concept?

QDD 077 A Severity Scale based on Quality Dimensions

QDD 076 Use Force Field Analysis to Understand Nuances

QDD 075 Getting Use Information without a Prototype

QDD 074 Finite Element Analysis (FEA) Supplements Test

QDD 073 2 Lessons about Remote Work for Design Engineers

QDD 072 Always Plot the Data

QDD 071 Supplier Control Plans and Design Specs

QDD 070 Use FMEA to Design for In-Process Testing

QDD 069 Use FMEA to Choose Critical Design Features

QDD 068 Get Unstuck: Expand and Contract Our Problem

QDD 067 Get Unstuck: Reframe our Problem

QDD 066 5 Options to Manage Risks during Product Engineering

QDD 065 Prioritizing Technical Requirements with a House of Quality

QDD 064 Gemba for Product Design Engineering

QDD 063 Product Design from a Data Professional Viewpoint, with Gabor Szabo (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 062 How Does Reliability Engineering Affect (Not Just Assess) Design?

QDD 061 How to use FMEA for Complaint Investigation

QDD 060 3 Tips for Planning Design Reviews

QDD 059 Product Design from a Marketing Viewpoint, with Laura Krick (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 058 UFMEA vs. DFMEA

QDD 057 Design Input & Specs vs. Test & Measure Capability

QDD 056 ALT vs. HALT

QDD 055 Quality as a Strategic Asset vs. Quality as a Control

QDD 054 Design Specs vs. Process Control, Capability, and SPC

QDD 053 Internal Customers vs. External Customers

QDD 052 Discrete Data vs. Continuous Data

QDD 051 Prevention Controls vs. Detection Controls

QDD 050 Try this Method to Help with Complex Decisions (DMRCS)

QDD 049 Overlapping Ideas: Quality, Reliability, and Safety

QDD 048 Using SIPOC to Get Started

QDD 047 Risk Barriers as Swiss Cheese?

QDD 046 Environmental Stress Testing for Robust Designs

QDD 045 Choosing a Confidence Level for Test using FMEA

QDD 044 Getting Started with FMEA – It All Begins with a Plan

QDD 043 How can 8D help Solve my Recurring Problem?

QDD 042 Mistake-Proofing – The Poka-Yoke of Usability

QDD 041 Getting Comfortable with using Reliability Results

QDD 040 How to Self-Advocate for More Customer Face Time (and why it’s important)

QDD 039 Choosing Quality Tools (Mind Map vs. Flowchart vs. Spaghetti Diagram)

QDD 038 The DFE Part of DFX (Design For Environment and eXcellence)

QDD 037 Results-Driven Decisions, Faster: Accelerated Stress Testing as a Reliability Life Test

QDD 036 When to use DOE (Design of Experiments)?

QDD 035 Design for User Tasks using an Urgent/Important Matrix

QDD 034 Statistical vs. Practical Significance

QDD 033 How Many Do We Need To Test?

QDD 032 Life Cycle Costing for Product Design Choices

QDD 031 5 Aspects of Good Reliability Goals and Requirements

QDD 030 Using Failure Rate Functions to Drive Early Design Decisions

QDD 029 Types of Design Analyses possible with User Process Flowcharts

QDD 028 Design Tolerances Based on Economics (Using the Taguchi Loss Function)

QDD 027 How Many Controls do we Need to Reduce Risk?

QDD 026 Solving Symptoms Instead of Causes?

QDD 025 Do you have SMART ACORN objectives?

QDD 024 Why Look to Standards

QDD 023 Getting the Voice of the Customer

QDD 022 The Way We Test Matters

QDD 021 Designing Specs for QA

QDD 020 Every Failure is a Gift

QDD 019 Understanding the Purposes behind Kaizen

QDD 018 Fishbone Diagram: A Supertool to Understand Problems, Potential Solutions, and Goals

QDD 017 What is ‘Production Equivalent’ and Why Does it Matter?

QDD 016 About Visual Quality Standards

QDD 015 Using the Pareto Principle and Avoiding Common Pitfalls

QDD 014 The Who’s Who of your Quality Team

QDD 013 When it’s Not Normal: How to Choose from a Library of Distributions

QDD 012 What are TQM, QFD, Six Sigma, and Lean?

QDD 011 The Designer’s Important Influence on Monitoring After Launch

QDD 010 How to Handle Competing Failure Modes

QDD 009 About Using Slide Decks for Technical Design Reviews

QDD 008 Remaking Risk-Based Decisions: Allowing Ourselves to Change our Minds.

QDD 007 Need to innovate? Stop brainstorming and try a systematic approach.

QDD 006 HALT! Watch out for that weakest link

QDD 005 The Designer’s Risk Analysis affects Business, Projects, and Suppliers

QDD 004 A big failure and too many causes? Try this analysis.

QDD 003 Why Your Design Inputs Need to Include Quality & Reliability

QDD 002 My product works. Why don’t they want it?

QDD 001 How to Choose the Right Improvement Model

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

© 2025 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy