[Exploring Effective Presentations] Placing 'Facts' Before the Cover Page — Why My Presentations Have the 'Cover on the Second Page' | Inception-Style Presentation
*This is based on a project that was actually approved, with a slight touch of fiction. For confidentiality, product names, figures, and some settings have been replaced.
[What you will learn in this article]
・Why placing 'facts' before the cover page makes presentations easier to get approved
・The idea that people are convinced by 'scenes' before 'logic'
・The reason why the order of 'phenomenon → sense of discomfort → structural explanation' is effective
・How to change a proposal from something that is 'explained' to something that the audience 'discovers for themselves'
・Sequence design that can be applied not only to presentations but also to everyday design and thinking
When creating presentation materials, you usually start with a cover page.
There is a title, a subtitle, a slightly cool visual, and from there you proceed to the table of contents, background, issues, concept, and so on.
I used to do that too.
According to the textbook, I thought I should show the title first. I had never seen a document where the cover wasn't the first page.
However, for one specific project, the order was different.
The cover was not the first page.
What was on the first page was not the project name or the worldview, but just a simple fact.
Moreover, that page wasn't even an explanation I had written myself.
It was an excerpt from a newspaper article.
・This folding chair was restocked three times in its first month of release. It can be folded when not in use.
・It can also fit in a car.
・It doesn't get in the way even when placed in the corner of a room.
・When no longer needed, it is easy to give away or discard.
That was all there was on the page.
There was one photo and a few lines of short explanation. There were no flashy graphs. There were no words talking about the future.
Normally, the cover page would come before that.
'Why am I putting these facts first when I haven't even revealed the project name yet?'
'Isn't it usually the other way around?'
'Shouldn't I show the title first, start with the concept, and then explain the rationale?'
Even though I created it myself, I thought the order was a bit strange.
But for some reason, for that specific project, I felt it was more correct to place the phenomenon first.
When I actually presented in that order, the atmosphere was different.
Even before the other party had heard the explanation of the proposal, they were already starting to think about something in their minds.
'That certainly seems convenient.'
'It seems good for people living alone.'
'It might be helpful for people who move often.'
Such reactions appeared slightly on their faces.
Thinking back now, it might have been good that that one slide was not my own words.
It was not a story of 'I think this,' but rather 'This is actually what is happening.'
Moreover, that article contained not just talk of sales, but also
'Why it sold,' 'Why people wanted it,' 'In what kind of lifestyle it was accepted'
was written there as well.
Therefore, it conveys the scene more than just the numbers.
When people are shown a scene before being explained, they start to create meaning for themselves.
This looks convenient. This looks like it will sell. This looks like something I could put in my own home.
Those small realizations quietly pile up.
Only after that did I finally show the title page.
A Portable Study Chair
As a result, the explanation of the proposal was surprisingly fast.
They had a look that said,
'I see, that's what it is.'
Normally, you would have to start by explaining 'why it is necessary.'
The room is small.
The furniture is large.
Moving often.
Working from home has increased.
But few people can have a dedicated study.
You build up that background, and only then do you enter into the discussion of the proposal.
But that day was different.
The single page before the title page had already explained about half of it.
The audience does not need to understand from scratch.
In their minds, they already have
“space-saving”
“portability”
“stowable when not in use”
“fits into daily life”
as a premise.
Because they view the proposal with that mindset, they understand it quickly.
Furthermore, it feels less like being 'explained to' and more like 'realizing it for themselves'.
This is powerful.
People trust conclusions they find themselves more than those forced upon them.
That is why, lately, I have stopped putting much 'logic' at the beginning of my presentations.
What I place first is the phenomenon.
What is happening in the market.
What someone is struggling with.
Something that is selling for some reason.
Something inconvenient that everyone is putting up with.
Show such facts first.
However, it is not just any fact that will do.
It should not be just numbers, but something that allows one to imagine daily life.
It should not be my own argument, but something that is happening even when viewed by a third party.
It should not be 'convenient,' but something where you can see 'why it is convenient.'
Such facts make it easier for the other person to create a scene in their mind.
Then, the other person begins to wonder, 'Why is that?'
If you present your plan after they reach that state, the proposal becomes not something they are 'forced to listen to,' but an 'answer they found themselves.'
Looking back now, that document was a bit strange.
The cover page is on the second slide.
It is not a textbook presentation structure.
But I think that 'bit of strangeness' was actually a good thing.
Show the phenomenon before the title.
Place a sense of unease before the conclusion.
And finally, I will explain the reason.
[Summary]
・Presentations are more effective when you show the phenomenon first rather than starting with the logic.
・Especially when there are 'facts that have already occurred' or 'scenes from daily life,' the audience naturally begins to think about the meaning.
・When you present your proposal in that state, the audience feels more like they 'realized it themselves' rather than being 'explained to.'
・That is why the order of 'phenomenon → sense of incongruity → structural explanation' is powerful.