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
726 matching · page 19 / 31
58
narrative
EFX+ +Barclays+Credit+Bureau+Day+Presentation+2023
“A respectable investor-day deck with strong KPI-driven action titles but a broken ending and missing pillar structure — use slides 7 and 13 as title-craft exemplars, not the overall arc.”
↓ Closing is broken: filler slide (p.10) + 'Appendix' divider (p.11) precede the real key-takeaways (p.12) and headwind chart (p.13), so the deck ends without a landing
58
narrative
Barclays Q1 2025 Review of Shareholder Activism 15 04 2025
“A data-rich quarterly market update with disciplined action titles and clean metrics, but it is a briefing — not a Storymakers exemplar — because it never converts its analysis into a recommendation; use slides 11-16 as teaching examples for action titles, not the overall structure.”
↓ No tension/complication act — the deck reports 'activity up' but never poses the 'so what' question for a target company or board
58
narrative
Barclays Investor Presentation 2018
“Competent investor-relations deck with a solid pyramid opener and case-study spine, but it is not a Storymakers exemplar — use pp.15-20 and select titles (p.40, p.34) for teaching declarative titling and evidence stacking, not the overall structure.”
↓ No Complication: the deck never names a problem, risk, or gap the strategy is solving — weakening the SCQA arc
58
narrative
2024 barclays 17th annual global consumer staples conference
“Serviceable investor-conference deck with a clear dual-executive arc and an explicit close, but the missing Complication, topic-label financial titles, and absent pillar dividers make it a cautionary example of how IR decks default to analytical dumps — use its p.5/p.15 titles as positive micro-examples, not its structure.”
↓ No Complication act — deck moves Market (p.4) → Share gains (p.5) → Recipe (p.8) with no named threat, inflation pressure, or strategic choice to resolve
58
narrative
20230215 Q422 FI Investor Presentation vFFF
“A competently structured FY22 fixed-income investor deck with strong MECE pillars and good metric-driven titles in the Performance section, but it is an analytical pillar-walk not a Storymakers arc — use its section architecture and action-title patterns as teaching material, not its opening or close.”
↓ No closing recommendation or next-steps slide — deck ends on ESG ratings (p51) then appendix, leaving the reader with no 'therefore'
58
narrative
ALTAGAMMA 2018 WORLDWIDE LUXURY MARKET MONITOR
“A data-rich industry monitor with disciplined numeric action titles and an early-stated thesis, but it buries the 'so what' under an analytical sprawl and fades into a vague purpose exhortation — use pp. 2, 11, 18 and 26 as teaching examples of insight titling, not the deck's overall structure.”
↓ Resolution collapses into one vague slide (p. 30 'Be driven by purpose...') with no prioritized moves or owner/timeline — weak 'so what' for a 30-page build-up
58
narrative
IT SERVICES The Rates of Success, Goals, and Future Priorities of Digital Transformations, by Sector
“A competent BCG benchmarking note with strong answer-first opening and insight-bearing analytical titles, but it ends without a recommendation and lets its core priority section collapse into topic labels — useful as a teaching example for action-title discipline in the first half, not for full-arc Storymakers structure.”
↓ No recommendation or next-steps act — deck ends on an ESG data slide (p.16) followed only by an author contact page (p.17)
58
narrative
COVID-19 BCG Perspectives Publication #5 with a focus on Revamping Organizations for the New Reality
“A hybrid briefing/publication with a strong analytical spine but no resolution act — use the economic-scenarios section (p.28-35) as a teaching example of declarative titling, not the overall structure.”
↓ No closing recommendation slide — deck ends at p.38 and drops straight into appendix (p.39-42), disclaimer (p.44), and contact (p.45)
58
narrative
TODAY'S CONSUMERS REVEAL THE FUTURE OF HEALTHCARE
“A competent survey-findings deck with decent action titles mid-deck but no Resolution — useful as a teaching example of quantified callouts, not of Storymakers arc structure.”
↓ No recommendation slide: the deck ends on slide 13's reframing and a contact page (14), violating the Resolution act entirely
58
narrative
The Hotel Property Handbook 4.0 Investment & Financing Keys
“A competent, well-chaptered Deloitte market-handbook that reads as analytical reference rather than persuasive story — use it as an example of MECE sectioning and hero-metric callouts, not as a Storymakers arc exemplar.”
↓ No thesis or answer-first slide in the opening five — reader gets momentum stats but no argument
58
narrative
The True-Luxury Global Consumer Insight (7th Edition)
“A competent BCG industry-insights report with strong data-bearing action titles, but narratively it is an analytical dump without an SCQA resolution — use pp.9, 11, 14, 18 as teaching examples for action-title quality, not the overall structure.”
↓ No answer-first slide: thesis only hinted at on p.6 after 5 front-matter/context pages
58
narrative
The Evolving State of Digital Transformation
“A well-crafted survey-findings brief with exemplary stat-led action titles, but structurally an analytical walk with no complication and no recommendation — use individual slides as title-writing exemplars, not the deck as a narrative model.”
↓ No recommendation or resolution slide — deck ends on p.16 describing COVID priorities, then a disclaimer, leaving the reader without a "now what"
58
narrative
Making WorkWorkBetter for Deskless Workers
“A credible analytical findings deck with strong diagnostic action titles but essentially no Resolution act -- use p.3, p.11, and p.14 as teaching examples of action-title craft, not the overall structure.”
↓ Recommendation is one slide (p.15) with a question-as-title -- the entire Resolution act is missing
58
narrative
Evaluating NYC media sector
“A competent sector-scan deliverable with strong slide-level action titles but weak narrative architecture — use the analytical slides (p.6-25) as a teaching example for quantified action titles, not the overall structure.”
↓ 10 redundant 'Agenda' slides (p.5, 8, 13, 15, 18, 20, 22, 26, 31, 37) — roughly 24% of the deck is navigation chrome
58
narrative
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
58
narrative
Reinventing Operations in Asset Management
“A research-report-style thought leadership deck with strong stats but topic-label titles and a missing recommendation act — useful as a teaching example of stat-led callouts, not of Storymakers narrative structure.”
↓ No declarative answer-first opening — p.1-3 set context without naming what Accenture believes the reader should do
58
narrative
Investor Analyst Conference
“A competent investor-conference results parade with genuinely strong declarative titles in the analytical middle, but it lacks narrative tension, MECE pillar scaffolding, and a real close -- use p.6/p.11/p.13 as action-title exemplars, not the overall structure.”
↓ Three consecutive slides (p.14-16) share the exact same title 'Highlights of our 360 value for all our stakeholders' -- signals a topic dump where pillar discipline should live
55
narrative
WORLD REFUGEE DAY
“A competent Ipsos research deliverable with strong data discipline but weak narrative craft — useful as a counter-example for action titles and closing structure, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ Slide titles are survey questions, not insights — p.30 'Q. My country's national labour market' should read something like 'Views on labour-market impact split nearly 50/50, with sharpest negativity in Türkiye and Hungary'
55
narrative
WHAT WORRIES THE WORLD? 2024
“A competently produced survey-data release with disciplined callouts but topic-label titles and no resolution; useful as a teaching example of insight-bearing callouts, not of Storymakers narrative structure.”
↓ Action titles are nouns, not insights — 'Current Economic Situation' repeats verbatim on p.35–46 instead of saying what each country shows
55
narrative
Understanding public attitudes to early childhood
“A competent research-findings deck with exemplary stat-led action titles but no Recommendation act — use slides 4, 6, 7, 13 as teaching examples for title craft, not the deck as a whole for narrative structure.”
↓ No recommendation or 'next steps' slide — closes on p.17 'Contact', so the analysis dies on the table
55
narrative
The Future of Procurement: Why is Technology Lagging Behind?
“A solid analytical middle wrapped in a bloated front-matter and a vendor-plus-change-mgmt tail — useful as a teaching example for action titles in the p.14–25 run, but not a Storymakers exemplar for overall arc, opening, or close.”
↓ Five-slide front-matter runway (p.1–5) before any argument; no thesis-forward opener
55
narrative
THE IPSOS AI MONITOR 2024
“A competent survey-data report with a strong opening stat but topic-label titles and a missing resolution act — useful as a counter-example of how raw survey questions kill action titles, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ 30+ slides use the literal survey question as the title (p.11-16, 20-23, 28-40), forcing the reader to derive every insight
55
narrative
Presentation to Regional Economic Prosperity Management Board
“A solid diagnostic mid-section bookended by a generic opening and a missing close — useful as a teaching example for action-title chains (slides 5-7), not as a Storymakers exemplar of full narrative arc.”
↓ No recommendation or decision slide — the deck ends at a projection (p.10) with no 'therefore' for the Management Board
55
narrative
PEOPLE AND CLIMATE CHANGE
“A competent insights report with pockets of strong action-titled storytelling, but it leans on repeated topic labels and a 40-page data appendix that buries its own recommendation — useful as a teaching example for individual insight titles (p9, p15, p20, p26), not for overall structure.”
↓ Title fatigue: 'Perceptions and understanding of climate risks' is used as the title for six distinct slides (p6, p8, p12, p13, p14, p16), making the deck feel like a topic dump instead of an argument