And unfortunately, the score is no better for those critical sales presentations. Data we’ve gathered shows that while companies self-assess the quality of their solutions on average at 8.1 out of 10 (where 10 is excellent), those same companies self-assess the quality of their solutions messaging at only 3.9/10.

Given that communication is such a high-stakes affair, why are we so poor?

We have all been subjected to a speaker toiling through some mind-numbing PowerPoint deck, and know instinctively that this can’t be the right way to do it. But simply blaming PowerPoint as we tend to do is missing the point completely. The real problem is far more interesting than the poor use of a software tool. It’s all about the poor use of an audience’s brain.

Here’s the real problem with communication: the human brain is wired in very particular ways regarding how it wants and needs to take in information. When communication aligns with how the brain wants to consume information, incredible, breakthrough effectiveness is possible. But when you misalign with the brain, you are guaranteed to fail. And guess what? Those dense, excessive, poorly sequenced PowerPoint slides run almost perfectly counter to way the listener’s brain works, and that’s why they fail. The key isn’t prettier slides. The key is understanding what the brain really wants.

One example: the brain stores information contextually. When presented with new information it looks for context – for something to attach that information to. If it can find it, the information can be stored, but if no context is found, it can’t be stored. Much like when we’re introduced to a random stranger at a cocktail party and simply can’t retain his or her name. We call information like this an “intellectual orphan”, and it does not stick in the brain.

Why does this matter to communicators? Because any argument that simply moves from point to point but lacks a logical flow BETWEEN those points is presenting intellectual orphans. That argument is destined to be forgotten within minutes, but it’s what most presenters do most of the time.

The solution is simple. Take the substance of the argument and create a logical sequential narrative, because sequence creates the context that the brain needs.  Just as a book’s chapters only make sense when read in sequence.

This is just one example of the relationship between brain wiring and communication, and reveals why most people communicate badly - because they have no idea what the brain’s rules are.

Perhaps the most important of these rules is that the human brain operates at the level of ideas. Yet the overwhelming majority of communicators take an approach that is thoroughly at odds with this reality. We bombard our audiences with as much fact and data as we can, usually thinking that we are making the best case we can, when in fact we are likely making the worst.

In almost any presentation I see, the big, brain-sticky ideas are murky at best, or completely hidden at worst. Indeed, in most “decks” you can’t find the ideas at all. Next time you are building any communication, go and apply this principle by asking this question: “What are my 2-3 big ideas?” Then build around them. Make them clear, prove them with your best data, not the most data you can, and strip away everything else that’s secondary.

And watch what happens.

---

Tim Pollard, author of The Compelling Communicator: Mastering the Art and Science of Exceptional Presentation Design (Conder House Press, 2016), is the founder and CEO of Oratium, a communications firm helping organizations from Fortune 500 companies to law offices hone their presentation and messaging skills.