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 59.8
· click a bar to filter
Search by prescribed fix
most common opening verb across 3405 suggestionsFiltered reviewed decks
374 matching · page 11 / 16
55
narrative
2024 TransAct Middle East
“Competent PwC market-update with a clear thesis on the cover and two genuinely insightful theme titles, but most analytical slides default to chart-label titles and the deck skips the Complication act — use pp.14-15 as a teaching example for action titles, not the overall structure.”
↓ Four chart slides (p.4, p.6, p.9, p.18) reuse near-identical 'Deal Volume FY-2021 to FY-2023' chart-label titles instead of stating what the chart proves.
55
narrative
Nielsen 2022 Audio Today How America Listens Jun22 FINAL
“A data-driven advocacy deck for radio that opens with a strong hook and insight-bearing titles but has no complication, no recommendation, and ends in an appendix — useful as a teaching example for action titles, not for narrative arc.”
↓ No Complication or Resolution act — the deck never poses a tension for advertisers nor recommends an action
55
narrative
ey og q2 2021 price point client deck
“A competent quarterly market briefing with strong callouts and quantified analysis, but it stops at 'here is what we see' and never reaches 'here is what to do' — useful as a teaching example for analytical build-up and editorial pull-quotes, not for storymaking structure or action titles.”
↓ No Resolution act — deck ends in 4 appendix slides plus contacts, with zero recommendation or 'what to do about it'
55
narrative
ey norwegian crypto adoption survey v2
“A competent survey-findings readout with strong action titles but no narrative arc or recommendation — useful as a teaching example for declarative slide titles, not for Storymakers structure.”
↓ No closing recommendation or 'so what' slide — deck ends at p.13 then dumps into appendix/disclaimer (pp.14–16)
55
narrative
ey connecting the dots m a deals in technology services in 2024
“A competent banker landscape report with strong action titles and tight analytical density, but it is a data brief — not a Storymakers exemplar — because it lacks a stakes-setting opening, MECE pillars and any closing recommendation.”
↓ No closing recommendation or 'so what' — deck ends on team_bio (p.9) and methodology/disclaimer, leaving the reader with data but no action
55
narrative
article thebeatjun2025
“A strong front-of-book market commentary that leads with the answer and writes real action titles, then degrades into an unstoryfied 30-page data appendix — use slides 1-15 as a teaching example of 'lead with the answer,' not the deck as a whole.”
↓ Pages 20-51 are a reference data dump with topic-label titles and no narrative thread — roughly half the deck does no storytelling work
55
narrative
Morgan+Stanley+Conference+Presentation
“A competent investor-conference showcase with strong action titles and a quantitative spine, but it is a parade of proof points rather than a Storymakers arc — useful as a teaching example for declarative titling, not for narrative structure or closes.”
↓ No closing recommendation or call-to-action; deck dies into a disclaimer at p.10 and a brand plate at p.11
55
narrative
The individual health insurance market in 2023
“A solid analytical market briefing with disciplined, number-led action titles, but it is not a Storymakers exemplar — use pp. 5–12 to teach insight-bearing titles, not the deck's overall arc, which lacks Complication, pillars, and Resolution.”
↓ No closing recommendation or 'so-what' — deck ends on p. 12 data and a wordmark (p. 13)
55
narrative
The Quantum Technology Monitor December 2020
“A competent state-of-the-market monitor with strong declarative analytical titles but no thesis up front and no recommendation at the end — use the middle slides as a teaching example for action-title craft, not the structure as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ No explicit thesis on slides 1-3 — the reader has to wait until p.4 to learn the deck's point of view
55
narrative
Review of 2024 capital markets performance
“A competent McKinsey market-review chartbook with strong action titles and a clever median-vs-mean build, but it lacks a resolution act and a real exec summary — useful as a teaching example for declarative titling, not for end-to-end Storymakers narrative.”
↓ No resolution act: the deck stops at p.13 with a trend observation rather than a recommendation or 'implications for executives' close
55
narrative
IoT Mobile Internet Data Analytics 2030
“Solid analytical build with quantified action titles and concrete case studies, but it is a discussion document not a recommendation deck - useful as a teaching example for action-titled body slides, not for narrative arc or closing.”
↓ No Answer/Resolution act - deck ends at p.14 on a stat, then 'Thank You' (p.15); the reader is left to synthesize the four threads themselves
55
narrative
Global gas outlook to 2050
“A credible thought-leadership 'perspective' with strong metric-bearing action titles, but structurally a methodology-and-data dump that buries its thesis and has no recommendation — useful as a teaching example for action-title craft, not for Storymakers narrative arc.”
↓ No BLUF: the thesis is never stated in the first three slides; opening is dominated by model inventory (p3) and scenario taxonomy (p4)
55
narrative
European Banking Summit 2018
“A well-titled benchmarking spine that diagnoses Europe's capital-markets gap clearly but stops before answering 'so what' — useful as a Storymakers exemplar of declarative chart titles, not of full SCQA arc construction.”
↓ No Resolution act — the deck ends on a precedent tease (p.9) and a contact slide (p.10) instead of a recommendation
55
narrative
A global view of how consumer behavior is changing amid COVID-19
“A well-titled McKinsey research briefing with a clean setup and a framework promise on p.4, but it is an S-C-A deck with the R amputated — useful as a teaching example for action-title craft, not for full Storymakers arc.”
↓ No resolution act — deck ends on p.18 heatmap + p.19 disclaimer with zero recommendations, implications, or next steps
55
narrative
Japan Hospital Insights Survey Findings Summary materials
“A disciplined survey-findings report with strong declarative action titles and clean MECE pillar dividers, but it buries the thesis behind methodology and ends as a sales pitch — borrow its titling and section-divider discipline, not its overall structure.”
↓ Opening burns 6 pages on methodology before a single finding (pp 1–6); the thesis is never stated up front
55
narrative
2023 SEA Hospital Insights Survey Findings Summary materials
“A competent survey-findings deck with strong declarative titles and MECE-ish themes, but no recommendation arc — use the title-writing and section discipline as a teaching example, not the narrative structure.”
↓ No synthesis or recommendation slide — the deck ends on a finding (p.40) and jumps to L.E.K. self-promo
55
narrative
2022 Manufacturing Survey
“A competent survey-results executive summary with a clear thesis on p.4 but topic-label titles and a data-dump close — useful as a teaching example of how analytical credibility alone doesn't make a Storymakers deck.”
↓ Closing slides (p.9-10) are a 2-of-2 data appendix, not a recommendation — no 'where to play / how to win' synthesis
55
narrative
GenAI Survey 2024
“A competent survey-findings deck with above-average action titles but no narrative resolution — useful as a teaching example for headline-writing on data slides, not for end-to-end Storymakers structure.”
↓ No Resolution act — deck ends on a regulation stat (p.12) with zero «recommended actions» or «what to do Monday morning» slide
55
narrative
presentation us tl strategy sma
“A textbook 4Ps JPMAM fund-marketing deck with a strong analytical middle (Case + Process) but a credentials-led opening and a data-dump close — useful as a teaching example for action-titled industry-trend pages and case studies, not for SCQA narrative structure.”
↓ Thesis is buried: pp. 1–7 are cover, TOC, divider, and firm credentials; the strategy itself doesn't appear until p.8 — no 'lead with the answer' slide.
55
narrative
ipsos the perils of perception 2024
“A competent research-findings report with a clear thesis but no resolution - useful as a teaching example of how strong opening callouts and one well-titled correlation slide (p.35) get drowned by question-as-title data dumps and a missing recommendations act.”
↓ Action titles are survey questions, not insights - p.13/14/15 all share the same interrogative title with no takeaway
55
narrative
does the us have a positive influence around the world ipsos survey 2025
“A short data-release deck that hooks with a question but never answers it — useful as a cautionary example of how strong cover questions get buried by topic-label data slides and a contact-card close.”
↓ No answer slide: the cover poses a question but no slide explicitly resolves it with a headline takeaway
55
narrative
Ipsos Global Happiness Index 2025 1
“A solid research-data report with two strong insight titles but no narrative arc and no resolution — use slides 7-9 as examples of good action titles, not the deck as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ No resolution act: the deck stops at heatmaps (p.19-20) and jumps straight to Methodology — no synthesis, recommendation, or implication slide
55
narrative
Goldman Sachs Sixteenth Annual ANZ Investment Forum Presentation
“A competent corporate IR/forum overview with clean section architecture but topic-label titles in the segments block, no complication, and an appendix that duplicates the main narrative — useful as an example of MECE structure and occasional declarative financial titles, not as a Storymakers arc exemplar.”
↓ Operating-group section uses the segment name as the slide title 3-4 times each (slides 28-36 and again 63-66) — readers can't tell pages apart by title alone
55
narrative
Goldman Sachs Presentation Final
“A competent investor-conference deck with a strong analytical mid-section but no thesis up front and no recommendation at the close — use slides 7-12 as a mini exemplar of action-title + callout discipline, not the deck's overall arc.”
↓ No explicit thesis or stakes in the first 5 slides; p.3 'U.S. Bancorp' is a topic label where a point-of-view slide should be