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 1 / 31
85
opening
Accenture Consumer Value Report 2021
“A well-structured commissioned value-quantification report with a strong BLUF opening and MECE essential/enriches pillars, but it is an analytical exposition rather than a Storymakers exemplar - it teaches pillar design and quantified action titles, not how to close with a recommendation.”
↓ No Resolution / CTA: deck ends on a gaming case study (p.27) then methodology - missing a 'what this means for NBN Co / policy / retailers' closing slide
85
opening
Cloud-migration opportunity: Business value grows, but missteps abound
“A tight, well-opened McKinsey 'point of view' mini-deck with insight-bearing titles and a clear value-at-stake hook, but the closing recommendation is buried in a run-on title - use the opening and metric-per-slide discipline as a teaching example, not the close.”
↓ Closing slide (p.8) action title is a 36-word run-on, not a directive; weakens the call to action
82
opening
Resiliency in the making
“Competent consulting thought-leadership report with a strong quantified hook and three-pillar structure, but weakened by redundant titling and a missing call-to-action — use the opening bookend (p.2-3) and case-study pairing pattern as teaching examples, not the overall structure.”
↓ Title 'Resiliency in the making' is reused as a slide title on p.18 and p.26 — wastes two action-title slots on branding repetition
82
opening
The Hidden Value of Culture Makers
“A well-crafted thought-leadership narrative with a strong opening and a memorable proprietary framework, but it trails off into case studies and a soft CTA instead of landing a prescriptive recommendation — use the opening and quantified-stakes sections as teaching examples, not the closing.”
↓ Conclusion slide (p.22) titled 'In conclusion' — textbook topic-label anti-pattern in a deck that otherwise uses action titles
82
opening
The art of AI maturity Advancing from practice to performance
“A disciplined Accenture thought-leadership deck with a genuine SCQA spine and a clean five-pillar recommend+case-study build — use the divider ladder and pillar pairing as a teaching example, but not the soft landing or the label-style analytical titles.”
↓ No explicit call-to-action slide; the deck trails off into author bios (p.32–33) and a six-page appendix (p.34–39), with the C-suite self-assessment (p.31) buried before them
82
opening
Fast-moving consumer goods: Driving value creation in an era of disruption
“A tight, well-titled BCG point-of-view deck with a textbook 'lead-with-the-answer' opening and a consistent five-imperatives scaffold, but the diagnosis act is too thin and the closing slips into topic-label territory — use p.3-p.7 as a teaching example of action-title discipline, not the deck as a full SCQA exemplar.”
↓ Diagnosis act is only ~3 slides (p.5-7) before pivoting to recommendations on p.9, leaving the 'why these 5 imperatives' logic underbuilt
82
opening
Transform Special Situations Index
“Short analytical index-release with a strong hook and mostly declarative titles but no resolution - use p.1-p.2 as an opening-hook exemplar, not as a full Storymakers arc.”
↓ No Resolution act - deck ends on p.7 sector data with zero recommendation, implication, or 'what leaders should do'
82
opening
Sustainability Private Markets
“A solid evidence-driven BCG research deck with strong action titles and parallel pillar structure, but it trails off into an appendix instead of closing the loop — use the analytical middle as a teaching example, not the ending.”
↓ Closing is weak: p.16 recommends only for the employee pillar and p.17 is a methodology appendix — no synthesis slide
82
opening
European Consumer Sentiment Survey: How current events in Europe are shaping consumer behavior
“A textbook McKinsey consumer-research deck with a strong opening and disciplined three-pillar MECE spine, but it stops at analysis — use it as an exemplar for action titles and pillar structure, not for the full Storymakers S→C→A→R arc.”
↓ No resolution act — the deck ends on data slides (p38–p39 splurge intent) and a blank McKinsey logo (p40), with no 'implications for retailers/brands' or call to action
82
opening
Roland Berger Construction Radar – Impacts on DACH region
“Tight, answer-first scenario-planning deck with strong analytical spine but a thin recommendation tail — use p.2 and p.5-9 as Storymakers exemplars for executive summaries and quantified action titles, not for the closing arc.”
↓ Recommendation compressed into a single slide (p.11) with a generic callout — disproportionate to the 4-slide analytical build-up
82
opening
Gen AI amplified
“A well-sourced, well-opened thought-leadership deck with a discernible SCQA spine but a muddled third act and a rhetorical-not-actionable close — a useful teaching example for hook-writing and data-backed executive summaries, but not a Storymakers exemplar for framework discipline or call-to-action.”
↓ Post-recommendation slides p.17-18 re-open diagnostic questions ('Automation or augmentation?', 'The critical role of clinical leadership') after the framework has been delivered — breaks the S→C→A→R cadence
82
opening
Unlocking alpha in deals
“A well-architected thought-leadership report with a clean SCQA arc and MECE three-pillar spine — use the divider structure and analytical action titles as a teaching example, but flag the repeated 'Call to action' titles and missing operational close as the lessons in what to fix.”
↓ Three slides (p.18, p.22, p.26) all titled 'Call to action' — a topic label repeated verbatim, the opposite of action titling
82
opening
350e000c acff 48f1 ab1e fc2abe7a5f3c
“A Goldman weekly strategy note with a strong thesis opening and a reference-book middle — useful as a teaching example for lead-with-the-answer openings, but not as a story arc.”
↓ 27 consecutive analyze_data slides (p.6–32) with no narrative thread back to the Mag-7 question
82
opening
2019 cib investor day ba56d0e8
“A well-built JPM investor-day showcase with disciplined MECE pillars and metric-rich action titles, but it is a results-defense deck rather than a Storymakers exemplar — use pp.3–6 and the Markets build (pp.14–22) as title-quality and pillar-structure references, not as a model for narrative tension.”
↓ No SCQA complication — the deck never names a tension, threat, or strategic question, so every section reads as a victory lap rather than a resolution.
82
opening
Deutsche Bank Q4 FY 2024 Presentation
“Textbook investor-earnings deck with a strong answer-first opening and quantified scorecard, but analytical and segment sections revert to topic labels and it tails off into a 29-page appendix — use slides 2 and 6-8 as a teaching example of action titles, not the deck as a whole.”
↓ Segment section (p.20-24) titled by entity ('Corporate Bank', 'Investment Bank', 'Private Bank', 'Asset Management') instead of by insight — reader must parse callouts to learn which divisions are actually driving the thesis
82
opening
Q1 2025 Fixed Income Call
“Competent fixed-income investor update with a disciplined answer-first opening and strong main-body action titles, but it collapses at the close ('Summary and outlook') and leans on a bloated 25-slide appendix — use the p.2-p.14 arc as a teaching example for answer-first sequencing, not for narrative closure.”
↓ Weak close: p.15 'Summary and outlook' is a topic label with no stated outlook, no recommendation, and no memorable takeaway
82
opening
Deutsche Bank Q4 FY 2023 Presentation
“Competent earnings deck with a strong thesis-led opener but a noun-titled mid-section and a flat 'Outlook' close — use p.2-10 as a Storymakers exemplar of leading with the answer, not the overall structure.”
↓ Segment pages (p.21-25) revert to noun titles — 'Corporate Bank', 'Investment Bank', 'Private Bank' — forcing the reader to extract the insight from the callout
80
opening
Digital consumer spending India
“A structurally disciplined market-sizing + sector-diagnosis deck with a strong thesis-forward opening and clean MECE pillars, but it buries its recommendation in a duplicated intervention slide and fades into case studies — use the sector-diagnosis spine (p11-21) as a Storymakers exemplar, not the closing act.”
↓ p24 and p25 share the exact same title 'Key interventions for driving growth in digital transactions' — the central recommendation slide is duplicated instead of sharpened
80
opening
UK Electricity Efficiency Potential
“A rigorous DECC-commissioned diagnostic with answer-first framing and quantified action titles, but it stops at 'here is the gap' instead of 'here is what to do' — use pages 4, 12, 15, and 28 as Storymakers exemplars of metric-led titles, not the deck's overall arc.”
↓ No recommendation or call-to-action slide — deck ends on a conditional frame (p.61 'What you would need to believe...') and dissolves into appendix
80
opening
GenAI Norway Productivity
“A high-quality analytical research report with exemplary action-title craft in the main body but no consultative resolution — use p.8-p.16 as a teaching example for insight-bearing titles and quantified build-up, not as a model for a full Storymakers SCQA arc.”
↓ No call to action or recommendation slide — deck ends mid-appendix on p.26 (Risk & Legal case study)
80
opening
PwC Golden Age index Unlocking a potential $3.5 trillion prize from longer working lives
“A solid analyst-led research report with strong answer-first opening and quantified action titles in the core build, but the recommendation lands mid-deck and the close trails off into benchmark and correlation appendices — useful as a teaching example for quantified callouts and exec-summary framing, not for end-to-end Storymakers structure.”
↓ Recommendation buried at p.25 of 57 with no closing reprise — the deck ends in correlation analysis (p.50) before methodology
80
opening
Vehicle-as-a-Service From vehicle ownership to usage-based subscription models
“A disciplined Deloitte industry POV with a strong answer-first opening and a rallying close — usable as a Storymakers exemplar for S→C→A→R framing and call-to-action craft, but the middle analytical pillars are a cautionary tale on MECE sprawl and topic-label titles.”
↓ Eight numbered sections with overlapping scope — 05 LTV and 06 Operating Model read as the same idea split in two
80
opening
13.02.23 Annual Results Presentation
“A disciplined annual results readout with answer-first opening and clean MECE pillars, but soft on tension and ends on a taper — useful as a Storymakers exemplar of structure and answer-first openings, not of dramatic arc or insight-bearing titles in data sections.”
↓ Topic-label titles in the financial section (p4 'Revenue Breakdown by Region', p6 'Revenue Breakdown by Audience', p10 'Change in Operating Margin', p13 'Debt by Maturity') waste the most insight-rich pages
78
opening
The next billion consumers
“A solid thought-leadership deck with a strong quantified opening and clean segmentation, but the recommendation framework is under-titled and the close rallies rather than resolves; useful as an exemplar for action-title data slides, not for closing arc.”
↓ Four-driver framework (p.27-38) is introduced via divider words ('Digital brain', 'Digital brawn') not insight titles, and each driver is explained through 'Ask:' prompts rather than imperatives