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
635 matching · page 20 / 27
52
opening
Rail industry cost and revenue sharing (2011)
“A rigorous, MECE-disciplined UK government-policy advisory deck with an admirably explicit recommendation thread - use the numbered-pillars structure (10 practicalities, 8 options) and the recommendation->timeline close as Storymakers teaching examples, but not the overall arc, which buries the rail-industry context in an end-of-deck appendix and opens too slowly to surface the thesis.”
↓ Background-on-the-industry section (p.134-170, 37 slides) sits at the END rather than the front, so context that should have set up the stakes instead trails the recommendation and dilutes the close
52
opening
Moving faster: Reinventing compliance to speed up, not trip up
“A well-architected survey-report-as-deck with disciplined sectioning and a memorable Compliance Pioneer payoff, but action titles default to topic labels and the close substitutes metaphor for a recommendation — useful as a teaching example for repeating per-pillar 'Actions' beats, not for headline writing.”
↓ Action titles overwhelmingly topic labels (e.g. p.11 'Negative impacts of increased complexity', p.17 'A different way', p.34 'Culture of compliance') — the insights live in callouts, not headlines
52
opening
2022 retail industry outlook
“A compact, co-branded Deloitte+Workday POV with a workable problem→answer spine but topic-labelled bookends and no explicit call-to-action — useful as a teaching example of mid-deck action titles (p.5, p.7), not of opening or closing craft.”
↓ p.3 'Executive summary' is a label, not a thesis — the deck never leads with its answer
52
opening
2019 Global Shared Services Survey Report 11th biannual edition
“A competently structured Deloitte survey-findings report with strong callouts but topic-label titles and no recommendation — use it as a teaching example of the gap between insightful callouts and weak action titles, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ Titles are survey questions, not insights — p7, p8, p10, p13, p15, p16, p18, p19, p21, p22 all read as interview prompts rather than conclusions
52
opening
inv research 20210422 investing and covid 19 0
“A competent Ipsos research report with a front-loaded exec summary but a topical, SCQA-free structure and no recommendation - mine p.6-9 and p.31-32 as teaching examples of insight titles, but do NOT use the overall structure as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ No recommendation or call-to-action slide anywhere in the deck; closes on a neutral stat (p.55) then appendix and contact info (p.60)
52
opening
barclays ceo energy power conference 2018
“A competent investor-conference deck with pockets of strong Storymakers craft (action titles p.6/p.7/p.14, quantified callouts p.9-p.13) but no SCQA spine and a topic-label closing — useful as a teaching example for action titles and callouts, not for overall narrative architecture.”
↓ Opening delays the thesis: disclaimer (p.2) + tagline (p.3) + framework stub (p.4) + identity (p.5) burn four slides before any insight
50
opening
Out @ Work Barometer
“A competently titled survey readout with strong individual insight slides (especially the p.11 paradox) but no resolution act — use it as a teaching example for action-title discipline, not for narrative architecture.”
↓ No recommendation or next-steps slide — the deck ends at p.13 on a diagnosis ('missing out on talent')
50
opening
Georgia Medicaid 1115 1332 Waiver
“A competent proposal-format deck with strong credentialing moments but no narrative arc and no ask — useful as a Storymakers counter-example of how 'Phase X: topic' titling and a 'Questions & Discussion' close flatten an otherwise substantive engagement plan.”
↓ No SCQA setup — the deck never states Georgia's specific complication or the answer before diving into methodology
50
opening
Familiar challenges new approaches
“A competent survey report with a clean three-pillar spine but weak action titles and no recommendation — useful as a teaching example for chapter dividers and quote-slide pacing, not for narrative arc.”
↓ Many data slides ship the raw 'Exhibit N: <question text>' as the title (p.7, p.10, p.11, p.13, p.18, p.19, p.24, p.30) — the chart caption is doing the work an action title should
50
opening
Hospital Priorities 2023 China Edition: Strategic Implications for Pharma Companies
“A well-researched, well-titled data-read on Chinese hospital priorities that reads like a survey report rather than a Storymakers narrative — use it as a teaching example for declarative chart titles, not for story architecture.”
↓ No answer/resolution act: p.14 asks 'How can pharmas interact more productively with hospital customers?' but no recommendation slide follows
50
opening
Mergers and Acquisitions in LatAm: Evolution and prospects
“A well-sourced LatAm M&A market scan with strong action titles and credible data, but it reads as an analytical report rather than a Storymakers deck — use it as an example of declarative titling and country deep-dive structure, not as a model for narrative arc or closing.”
↓ No closing recommendation, outlook, or 'so what' slide — deck terminates on Peru analysis (p.30) then bio + disclaimer
50
opening
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
50
opening
Quantum Technology Monitor 2022
“A well-titled, data-rich industry monitor with strong slide-level discipline but no narrative arc or recommendation — useful as a teaching example of action-titling and callout craft, not of Storymakers structure.”
↓ No SCQA or thesis slide in the first 5 pages — p.2 'What does this document provide?' is a meta-description, not a stake
50
opening
Responding to Covid-19 (2021)
“A competent COVID-19 reference almanac with strong action titles and clear callouts, but it lacks an SCQA frame and ends in a marketing CTA — useful as a teaching example for action-title and callout craft, not for narrative architecture.”
↓ No SCQA setup in the opening: p.1-3 are cover/intro/TOC and p.6 is a generic 'summary facts' page rather than a thesis
50
opening
ovid-19 Special Primer (2020)
“A well-evidenced topical primer with strong declarative titles but no Storymakers narrative arc — useful as a teaching example for action-title craft and chart-level rigor, not for deck-level story design.”
↓ No thesis slide and no synthesis slide — p.2 openly frames this as a 'round-up,' so 7 sections sit side-by-side with no unifying argument
50
opening
Vitamins & Dietary Supplements Market trends – Overview
“A competent PwC market-overview deck with strong declarative titles on data slides, but it is a report not a story — use slides 8-13 as a teaching example for action-title craft, not the overall structure.”
↓ No recommendation, 'so what,' or call-to-action slide — the deck stops at the last regional forecast (p.22) and jumps straight to Contacts (p.23)
50
opening
Insurance landscape evolution and emergence of MGA/ MGU model
“A well-structured Asian insurance market scan with strong MECE dividers and mostly insight-bearing action titles, but it analyzes more than it argues — useful as a teaching example for section spines and metric-in-title discipline, not for closing the loop with a recommendation.”
↓ No answer-first slide: the thesis never appears in the first 3 pages — agenda promises a 'deep dive' instead of stating a finding
50
opening
Trend Compendium 2050 Full Version
“A high-quality thought-leadership compendium with strong quantified titles but no SCQA spine — useful as an exemplar of action-title craft, not of executive narrative.”
↓ No SCQA opening: p.1-5 establish topic and scope but never state a thesis or stakes the executive must care about
50
opening
Medical Affairs Outlook Report
“A competent industry-outlook report with a recognizable arc and a few strong action titles, but it leads with topic instead of thesis and ends in platitude — useful as a 'callouts done right' example, not as a Storymakers structural exemplar.”
↓ Opening (p.1–3) never states the thesis — the executive summary callout is a vague consensus statement, not the answer
50
opening
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
50
opening
Project Spiritus Final report Market Study
“Textbook EY market study with exemplary action-title craft and strong MECE scaffolding, but it's a diagnosis without a prescription — use the section openings and title discipline as a teaching example, not the overall arc.”
↓ No Resolution act — closing growth-opportunities slide (p.92) is descriptive, not prescriptive; deck never tells the reader what to do
50
opening
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
50
opening
The Next Gen Index Millennials and Gen Z in the US
“A data-driven trend report with strong metric-anchored titles but no recommendation arc — useful as a teaching example for action-title hygiene, not for narrative structure.”
↓ No recommendation or 'so what' — closes on a context slide (p.17) that restates a generic premise instead of resolving
50
opening
The Swiss FoodTech Ecosystem 2021
“A well-researched ecosystem atlas masquerading as a deck — useful as a reference document but a weak Storymakers exemplar because it lacks thesis, tension, and recommendation; teach it as a cautionary case for landscape reports that forget to make an argument.”
↓ No recommendation or call to action anywhere — the deck is a landscape map with no 'so what.'