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 16 / 31
60
opening
2021 Global Shared Services and Outsourcing Survey Report
“A competent Deloitte survey-report deck with strong quantified callouts but interrogative topic titles and a contact-us ending — useful as a teaching example of insight-rich captions trapped inside a question-driven structure, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ Titles are questions, not answers — p.8, p.9, p.10, p.11, p.12, p.14, p.15, p.17, p.18, p.20, p.21, p.22, p.23 all use the 'What/How...?' pattern, forcing the reader to hunt the callout
60
opening
TrendRadar: The Future Consumer
“A competently scaffolded trend-catalog marketing deck with a strong framework but weak action titles and no recommendation — useful as a counter-example of how topic labels and a sales-CTA close undermine otherwise sound structure.”
↓ Section titles are reused verbatim across 3-5 slides (e.g., «Data Era & AI» on p.22-26, «Consumerism 2.0» on p.9-13) — no per-slide insight takeaway
60
opening
Reset Innovation Priorities
“A solid whitepaper-style how-to with a strong opening question and useful frameworks, but Storymakers-weak — figure-caption titles and a generic close make this a teaching example for analytical scaffolding, not narrative craft.”
↓ Action titles are figure captions, not insights — every framework slide (p.4, p.7, p.10, p.11, p.13, p.15) is titled 'Figure N: …'
60
opening
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
60
opening
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
60
opening
Mining Investment Fragile Conflict
“Compact 8-page executive brief with a coherent S→C→A→R spine and strong numeric titles, but it asks questions instead of leading with the answer and ends on a metaphor rather than a decision — useful as a short-form arc example, not as an opening or closing exemplar.”
↓ P.2 'Central questions' delays the thesis — opening should lead with the answer, not the questions
60
opening
University of Arizona 2018 Strategic Plan
“Solid MECE pillar architecture with quantified callouts, but topic-label titles and a missing closing slide make it an institutional planning document, not a Storymakers exemplar — useful as a teaching case for how strong structure cannot rescue weak action titles.”
↓ Action titles are nouns, not insights — every initiative slide is titled 'Pillar X Initiatives (n of m)' with zero takeaway
60
opening
Transportation Warehousing Sector
“A disciplined McKinsey diagnostic with strong MECE numbering and metric-laden action titles, but the recommendation is under-staged at p.22 and the deck loses its arc in the back third — use the p.8-20 problem-and-evidence sequence as a Storymakers teaching example, not the overall structure.”
↓ Closing is an appendix dump: p.39-40 'Other:' case studies sit outside the 1-5 challenge framework and replace what should be a 'so what / next steps' slide.
60
opening
PwC’s 24th Annual Global CEO Survey
“A solid annual-survey communication piece with strong data-driven titles in the middle, but it is a thematic tour rather than a Storymakers-grade narrative — useful as a reference for action-title craft on data slides, not as an exemplar of arc or close.”
↓ No resolution or recommendation slide — the cover promises 'a leadership agenda to take on tomorrow' but the body never delivers an agenda; p.17 closes with reflection, not action
60
opening
Global Top 100 companies 2023
“A competent annual benchmarking publication with strong analytical action titles in the middle, but it is a data report — not a Storymakers narrative — because it has no complication, no recommendation, and dissolves into ranking tables; use slides 5-8 as title-craft exemplars, not the deck as a whole.”
↓ No Complication or Resolution act — the deck never asks 'so what should leaders do?' and ends in ranking tables (p.17-21)
60
opening
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.
60
opening
Introduction to a dynamic market with numerous investment opportunities
“Competent banker primer with strong analytical action titles but a missing thesis up front and a marketing soft-close — useful as a teaching example for action-title craft on analytical pages, not for opening or closing structure.”
↓ Slide 3 'Executive Summary' is a label, not a synthesis — the deck never delivers a one-line thesis up front
60
opening
Luxury Goods Worldwide Market Study, Spring 2019
“A solid analytical market-update deck with above-average action titles and a real attempt at tension on p.9-10, but it has no recommendation act and ends in administrative pages — useful as an example of strong title craft, not as a Storymakers structural exemplar.”
↓ No recommendation or 'so-what' slide — the deck ends with team bios, contacts, methodology and a logo (p.11-15)
60
opening
POPULISM IN 2024
“A rigorous data report dressed as a deck — strong sample and a useful proprietary index, but it reads as a crosstab parade with no recommendation, so it's a counter-example for Storymakers titling and closing rather than an exemplar.”
↓ No recommendation or 'so what' slide — deck ends at p47 on a spending crosstab and then drifts into methodology and corporate boilerplate (p48-51)
60
opening
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
60
opening
The Reinvention of Retail Banking: How focused business models can unlock value
“A competent strategy& thought-leadership pamphlet with a recognisable S-C-A-R spine and a strong recommendation triad, but the framework core and section numbering wobble enough that it works better as a teaching example for editorial titles and closing structure than as a clean Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ Section numbering jumps 03 -> 05 between p.9 and p.16 with no visible 04 divider, breaking the MECE promise of the pillar structure
60
opening
A WORLD FOR TRAVEL NIMES SUMMIT
“A solid, clearly-structured Roland Berger advocacy deck with declarative titles and a punchy close — useful as a Storymakers exemplar for action-title discipline and section dividers, but not for opening hooks or tight SCQA framing.”
↓ Opening buries the answer — five context slides (pp.4-8) before the travel-specific complication on p.9, and the 'five commitments' promise only surfaces on p.12
60
opening
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
60
opening
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)
60
opening
Third-party governance and risk management The threats are real
“A data-rich Deloitte survey report with a clear diagnostic thesis ('execution gap') but no Resolution act and too many topic-label titles — use pp.22/26/28 as examples of good action titles, not the overall deck as a Storymakers structural exemplar.”
↓ No Resolution act — deck ends on technology analysis (p.35) then jumps straight to bios/contacts with zero recommendations or next-steps slide
60
opening
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
60
opening
Ipsos World Refugee Day 2024 Global Report PUBLIC 0
“A competent global survey report with strong synthesis sentences but topic-label titles and no recommendation — useful as a counter-example for why action titles matter, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ Titles are survey questions, not insights — p.11, p.12, p.17, p.18, p.30–34 all use 'Q. ...' verbatim where an action title belongs
60
opening
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
60
opening
ipsos predictions 2025 survey report
“A topically MECE survey read-out with a strong unease setup and three excellent analytical 2x2s, but the action titles are mostly survey prompts and the deck ends in methodology — use slides 28/69/71 as title-quality exemplars, not the deck as a Storymakers structural model.”
↓ Closing is an appendix dump (Methodology p.75-76, 'For more information' p.77) with zero synthesis, recommendation, or call back to the opening unease theme