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 61.6
· click a bar to filter
Search by prescribed fix
most common opening verb across 3405 suggestionsFiltered reviewed decks
374 matching · page 14 / 16
45
title quality
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.
45
title quality
Nielsen Fan Insights
“A competent data-reporting deck with strong callouts but topic-label titles and no recommendation — useful as a teaching example of clean section structure and quantified pull-quotes, but not as a Storymakers narrative exemplar.”
↓ No recommendation or 'so what' slide — deck ends at p.17 'Thank you!' with zero call to action
45
title quality
2023 Global Marketing Trends
“A credible trend-survey report mis-cast as a deck — useful as a cautionary example of how strong evidence and good callouts can still fail Storymakers when titles are topic labels and the closing is a URL.”
↓ No recommendation or 'so-what' slide — the deck ends on a blockchain chart (p.16) and a URL (p.17)
45
title quality
EY Foundation 2022 2023 Impact Report
“A competent non-profit impact report with strong stakes and a bold closing target, but title quality and the long un-pillared case-study run keep it short of a Storymakers exemplar — useful as a 'how to use callouts to carry the argument' counter-example more than a structural template.”
↓ Action titles are overwhelmingly nouns ('Income', 'Volunteers', 'Welcome', 'Smart Futures') instead of insight-bearing claims
45
title quality
id18 leveraging capabilities for wealth management
“A competent investor-day deck with a clean three-pillar middle and a proper synthesis close, but weak action titles and a missing complication act make it a useful example of IR-style structure rather than a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ Titles are overwhelmingly nouns, not insights — 'Our Key Priorities' (p.5), 'Our Businesses' (p.6), 'Wealth Management: Who We Are' (p.8) bury the takeaway
44
title quality
Charging Ahead Australia’s battery powered future
“This is an Accenture capabilities/credentials deck dressed as a research report — structurally tidy but narratively flat, with a context-heavy open and a case-study close; useful as an example of section-divider hygiene and MECE frameworks, not as a Storymakers narrative exemplar.”
↓ No thesis in the first 5 slides — opening is pure decarbonization context, never states the answer (pp.1-5)
42
title quality
European Distressed Credit Watch List
“A competently produced reference catalogue of distressed European credits with strong market-context data on the front end, but it abandons narrative craft at the case-study section and has no close — useful as a teaching example of what 'analytical dump with no resolution' looks like, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ No recommendation or 'so what' slide anywhere — the deck ends mid-catalogue at p.39 (Winoa) then jumps to contacts
42
title quality
Tested, Trusted, Transformed An exploration of the Corporate Affairs Function and its Leaders
“A competently structured research report with a memorable title device and a strong Five Maxims close, but titles carry topics not insights and the middle lacks narrative tension — use the bookend thesis and Five Maxims as teaching examples, not the interior title discipline.”
↓ Action titles are overwhelmingly questions or topic labels rather than insights (p.9, p.11, p.13, p.14, p.25) — a reader skimming the title stream cannot reconstruct the argument
42
title quality
IBV The Cognitive Enterprise
“A competent IBM thought-leadership brief with the right ingredients (client cases, a stake stat, next steps) but undermined by repeated topic-label titles and an invisible pillar structure — useful as a teaching example of why action-titling and section dividers matter, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ Six slides reuse the identical title 'The Cognitive Enterprise: The finance opportunity' (p.4, 8, 10, 12, 16, 18), erasing any sense of forward motion
42
title quality
Accelerating Sustainable and Inclusive Growth
“A pillar-organized ESG disclosure report with strong client-case storytelling but weak title discipline and no narrative resolution — useful as a teaching example for case-study slide construction (p.21–30) and pillar dividers, not as a Storymakers exemplar of the full S→C→A→R arc.”
↓ Action titles are predominantly topic labels ('Our approach' p.34, 'Development' p.36, 'Our people' repeated as title on p.37 and p.42) — readers cannot skim titles and reconstruct the argument
42
title quality
Accelerating Sustainable and Inclusive Growth
“An ESG compliance report dressed as a deck — front-loaded KPIs and a clean three-pillar spine are usable as teaching examples for section dividers, but topic-label titles, the missing complication act, and a 23-slide appendix tail make it a weak overall Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ Closing collapses into a 23-slide appendix tail (pp.67-89) with no recommendation or forward-looking ask — the deck ends on a CPA assertion (p.87) and a URL (p.89), not an invitation
40
title quality
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
40
title quality
2024 US CEO Outlook Pulse Survey
“A survey-results pulse report dressed as a deck — useful as a counter-example of topic-label titles and a missing resolution act, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ No resolution act — deck ends on an ESG data point (p.10) and a disclaimer (p.11) with zero recommendations, implications, or call to action
40
title quality
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
40
title quality
Sustainability Report 1 July 2022 – 30 June 2023
“A competent annual sustainability report with credible KPIs but topic-label titles and no SCQA spine — useful as a 'how to surface impact numbers' example, not as a Storymakers narrative exemplar.”
↓ Duplicate titles on pp.6–7 ('Key programmes helping us deliver on our corporate sustainability goals:') reveal the lack of distinct, MECE narrative pillars
40
title quality
Global Advisor War in Ukraine
“A competent survey-findings report with MECE-ish pillars but no narrative arc — use it as a cautionary example of topic-label titles and a missing resolution, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ Titles are nouns, not verbs: p.3, p.7, p.9, p.12 all read as chart captions rather than insights
40
title quality
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
38
title quality
Everest Group Retail Services
“A reprinted analyst-badge marketing asset, not a Storymakers deck — useful only as a counter-example of topic-label titles and appendix-as-closer; do not use as an exemplar.”
↓ Pages 5-11 are labelled only «Cognizant profile (page X of 7)» — seven consecutive topic-label titles with no insight, the single worst Storymakers violation in the deck.
38
title quality
Infrastructure Barometer Italy
“A classically-structured EY barometer report with credible data and sharp callouts, but weak as a Storymakers exemplar: topic-label titles and a missing Resolution act turn a potentially confident point of view into a survey readout.”
↓ No recommendation or Resolution act — the deck ends at p.12 on a 'divided opinion' note followed by Contacts, violating the Storymakers answer-first principle
38
title quality
IoT Big Data Value Creation
“An atmospheric thought-leadership deck that sets up a topic without ever delivering an answer — useful as a cautionary example of strong context with no Resolution act, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ No recommendation or call-to-action slide — closes on 'challenges' (p.17) and a Clarke quote (p.18) instead of an answer
38
title quality
Annual Report 2018
“A compliance-driven annual report dressed as a strategy story — useful as a counter-example of how regulator-mandated structure crushes Storymakers narrative, not as a positive exemplar.”
↓ No SCQA opening — first five pages contain zero stakes-setting; the strategic narrative does not begin until ~p.21 ('How we create value')
38
title quality
Turkish NPL Purchasing Market Overview and the way forward
“A rigorous, scenario-driven Turkish NPL market study with strong forecast craftsmanship but weak Storymakers hygiene — use p.18-30 as a teaching example for forecast architecture, not for narrative or action-title discipline.”
↓ The promised 'way forward' is missing — no recommendation, no implication-for-AMCs slide, and the deck ends in policy recap + abbreviations + contact rather than a close
38
title quality
MSDL 4Q23 Earnings Presentation
“A competent investor earnings deck whose callouts do the storytelling its titles refuse to — useful as a teaching example of how action callouts can rescue topic-titled slides, but not a Storymakers exemplar at the deck level.”
↓ Two disclaimer pages (p.2-3) before any thesis — opening real estate is wasted
35
title quality
Deloitte Global 2024 Gen Z and Millennial Survey Country profile: Netherlands
“A competent survey-data country report organised as a topic dump with noun-label titles and no arc or close — use it as a counter-example of what happens when action titles and resolution are missing, not as a Storymakers exemplar.”
↓ No Situation→Complication→Answer→Resolution arc: p.2 jumps straight from methodology into a topic parade with no central tension or thesis