AI critiques
Storymakers reviews of every deck.
Each deck reviewed by an AI editor through the Storymakers lens — narrative arc, opening hook, closing call-to-action, and action-title quality. With a one-line verdict, top strengths and weaknesses, and three concrete fixes per deck.
1086 reviewed decks
· mean 43.8
· click a bar to filter
Search by prescribed fix
most common opening verb across 3405 suggestionsFiltered reviewed decks
726 matching · page 25 / 31
28
closing
G@ Earth Day 2021
“A well-opened research report with strong analytical titles in the middle, but it ends in a topic-labelled data dump with no recommendation — use p.2–3 and p.8–10 as teaching examples for hooks and insight titles, not the overall structure.”
↓ No recommendation, implication or call-to-action slide — deck ends with 'THANK YOU' (p.44) and 'ABOUT IPSOS' (p.45) after a disclaimer
28
closing
inv research 20231129 crypto asset survey 2023
“A competently structured research-report deck with strong MECE pillars and answer-first summaries, but topic-label titles and a missing recommendation act make it useful as a teaching example of structure-without-argument rather than a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ No recommendation / 'so what' act — deck ends in an appendix with demographics (p.72), leaving the reader without next steps or policy implications
28
closing
2022 esg report
“A competent but structurally conservative ESG reporting document - strong as an index-backed compliance artefact and acceptable as a pillar-architecture example, but a poor Storymakers exemplar because titles are topic labels, there is no closing argument, and the deck reports rather than persuades.”
↓ Titles are topic dumps rather than insights - 'MATERIALITY' (p.10), 'TALENT DEVELOPMENT' (p.18), 'CLIMATE CHANGE' (p.37), 'DATA PRIVACY' (p.40) surface no finding even when the callout already contains one
28
closing
COPERNICUS Market report February 2019
“A rigorous nine-sector market impact report with strong MECE bones and good quantified case studies, but it is structured as a research deliverable rather than a Storymakers narrative — useful as a teaching example for parallel sector analysis and SWOT title-craft, not for opening hooks, action titles, or closing resolution.”
↓ No closing act — the deck stops at security case study p.155 with zero recommendation, next-step, or 'so what for EU funding' slide
28
closing
pwc my electric vehicle sales review q4 2024
“A competent quarterly data review with a strong opening hook and a few sharp regional titles, but it functions as a reference document rather than a Storymakers exemplar — use p.3 and p.7 as title-writing examples, not the structure.”
↓ No recommendation or next-steps slide — the deck ends in four consecutive 'Electric vehicle sales data' tables (p.19-22), then bios and 'Thank you' (p.25)
28
closing
ey emerging tech at work 2023 report updated
“A short EY survey-report deck with a strong human-centered hook but no resolution — useful as an example of leading with the answer (p.4), not as a full Storymakers arc.”
↓ No resolution act — p.9 is 'Questions | Contact us' rather than a recommendation or next-steps slide
28
closing
rapporto di sostenibilita ey italia eng
“A competent corporate sustainability report with a genuinely MECE three-pillar spine and strong KPI callouts, but it fails as a Storymakers exemplar — topic-label titles, six slides titled '2022', and an appendix-fade ending mean it should be used as a counter-example for title rewriting and answer-first openings, not as a structural model.”
↓ Six different slides titled simply '2022' (pp.31, 41, 55, 57, 66, 77) — a critical title-quality failure that hides the insight on each page
28
closing
article thebeatmar2025
“A monthly market chartbook with a strong answer-first opening and ~15 well-titled thesis slides, but the back half is an unstructured data reference with no closing recommendation — use slides 3-17 as a Storymakers exemplar for action titles, not the deck as a whole.”
↓ No resolution act — deck ends on a correlation table (p.51) and team bio (p.54), never restating or evolving the Top 4 Ideas from p.4
28
closing
luxury2019
“An EY luxury factbook with a memorable hook and exemplary financial-chart titling in its middle act, but no resolution and lazy navigation — use pp.12–29 as a teaching example for action titles, not the deck as a story arc.”
↓ Closing dissolves into four near-duplicate 'How can luxury fashion embrace digital?' slides (pp.75–78) with no synthesis or recommendation — the deck ends without answering its own opening question
28
closing
3Q23 Investor Presentation GS
“A classic IR/positioning deck structured as a capabilities tour — strong quantified callouts and solid competitive benchmarks, but no SCQA arc, no recommendation, and topic-label titles dominate; use p7–p10 as a teaching example of competitive benchmarking, not the deck's structure.”
↓ No Complication or Resolution — deck never poses the question it is answering, and never lands a recommendation or ask
28
closing
malcolm barr jp morgan
“A competent analyst-style inflation primer with a sharp opening question and an early answer, but with no MECE pillars and no closing recommendation — useful as a teaching example of lead-with-the-answer on p.2, not as a Storymakers structural exemplar.”
↓ No closing recommendation slide: deck ends on a tangential question (p.19) and rolls straight into 3 Disclosures pages (p.20–22)
28
closing
unlocking the uk s tech talent potential
“A well-sourced landscape report structured as a talent-lifecycle taxonomy — use the MECE pillar spine and embedded case studies as teaching examples, but not the narrative: it sets up a £63b problem and never delivers a recommendation.”
↓ No resolution: the £63b problem set up on p.3 is never tied to a recommendation, leaving the deck as a landscape report rather than a consulting argument
28
closing
Barclays Q12023 FI Presentation
“Bank fixed-income IR deck with disciplined action titles in the performance core but no narrative spine and no closing ask — useful as a teaching example of declarative title-writing on financial slides, not as a Storymakers story-arc exemplar.”
↓ No closing synthesis — deck ends at ESG ratings (p.48) and an appendix (p.49-51) with zero recap, recommendation, or call to action for FI investors
28
closing
Barclays Q32023 FI Presentation
“A textbook fixed-income IR deck with strong declarative titles and clean pillar discipline, but no story arc or ask — use pp6-14 as a teaching example for action-title craft, not the deck's overall structure.”
↓ No BLUF slide: pp3-4 ('Q323 themes' / 'Outlook') are topic labels where the thesis should live
28
closing
TSN Barclays Consumer Staples FINAL
“A well-structured investor outlook deck with a crisp Grow/Deliver/Sustain spine and mostly declarative titles, but it lacks tension and ends on 'Thank you' — useful as an exemplar of pillar discipline and action-title craft, not of full SCQA narrative.”
↓ No Complication/tension act — the story is all reassurance, which flattens the narrative into an analytical dump despite the clean pillar structure
28
closing
Barclays FY2023 ESG Investor Presentation
“A competent ESG disclosure deck structured as a taxonomy rather than a story — useful as a teaching example of MECE pillar dividers and KPI dashboards, but a cautionary example for Storymakers narrative: no complication, no recommendation, and a closing that dissolves into appendix.”
↓ No complication or recommendation — the 'Answer' act of SCQA is entirely absent; no slide says 'so here is what we are committing to next'
28
closing
Deutsche Bank Q1 2023 Presentation
“A competent IR earnings deck with an answer-first opening and strong callouts, but structurally an analytical status report rather than a Storymakers narrative — use its executive summary and segment callouts as exemplars of answer-first writing, not its overall arc or title discipline.”
↓ No Complication act — the deck never frames a problem or tension, so the analysis has nothing to resolve; it reads as a status update, not a story
25
closing
Pulse of Change Index
“A well-titled survey-findings summary with a strong analytical core but no resolution act — useful as a teaching example for action titles and quantified hooks, not for full Storymakers arc.”
↓ No resolution act — deck ends on a data point (p.10) and methodology (p.11), with zero 'what to do about it' recommendation
25
closing
2021 P&C Underwriting Survey
“A rigorous but inert survey-findings readout — useful as a teaching example of consistent callouts and segmentation discipline, but a Storymakers anti-example for its noun-titles, missing recommendation act, and taxonomy-over-argument structure.”
↓ No recommendation or 'so what' act — deck ends on open-end verbatims (p.57-58) with zero call to action
25
closing
2019 True-Luxury Global Consumer I nsight
“A data-rich BCG research readout with competent chart-level action titles but no story arc or recommendation — useful as a teaching example for action-title discipline on analytical slides, not for Storymakers narrative structure.”
↓ No recommendation or 'what brands should do' slide — the deck ends at p.49 'THANK YOU' straight after a Made-in Italy chart
25
closing
The Dawn of the Deep Tech Ecosystem
“A well-researched BCG/Hello Tomorrow landscape report with strong analytical build in the France section, but structured as observational reporting rather than a Storymakers argument — use p.30-38 as a teaching example for benchmark storytelling, not the overall spine.”
↓ No recommendation/resolution pillar — the deck ends at success stories (p.39) then appendix, so the problem framed on p.32 ('France Could Increase its Presence and Funding') is never answered
25
closing
What’s in a (Domain) Name? The $2 Billion Secondary Market for Dot-Com Domains
“A tightly argued market-sizing brief with strong action-title discipline and a clean narrative pivot, but it stops at 'what is true' and never lands 'so what' — use it as a teaching example for headline writing and SCQA hinges, not for closing the loop.”
↓ No Resolution act: deck ends on a data table (p.16) then 'THANK YOU' (p.18) with no recommendation, implication, or next step
25
closing
Everest Group RCM Operations
“A reprinted analyst-report vendor profile with one good action title (p.4) and six dead topic-label slides — useful as a negative example for Storymakers training on action titles and missing closes, not as a structural exemplar.”
↓ Six consecutive 'Cognizant profile (page N of 6)' slides (p.5–p.10) are a topic dump with zero insight-bearing titles — the reader cannot scan and know what each page claims
25
closing
Deloitte Global Treasury Survey
“A competent survey-findings report with clean pillar structure and strong data, but not a Storymakers exemplar — use it to teach MECE sectioning and data callouts, not narrative arc or action titling.”
↓ No recommendation or 'so what' slide — deck ends at p.20 on a trend observation before 'Contact us'