PDA

View Full Version : On Powerpoint



Entropy
07-12-2009, 11:39 PM
This is the best thing (http://www.afji.com/2009/07/4061641) I've read all week:


Every year, the services spend millions of dollars teaching our people how to think. We invest in everything from war colleges to noncommissioned officer schools. Our senior schools in particular expose our leaders to broad issues and historical insights in an attempt to expose the complex and interactive nature of many of the decisions they will make.

Unfortunately, as soon as they graduate, our people return to a world driven by a tool that is the antithesis of thinking: PowerPoint. Make no mistake, PowerPoint is not a neutral tool — it is actively hostile to thoughtful decision-making. It has fundamentally changed our culture by altering the expectations of who makes decisions, what decisions they make and how they make them. While this may seem to be a sweeping generalization, I think a brief examination of the impact of PowerPoint will support this statement.

Schmedlap
07-13-2009, 12:07 AM
Nice. I've never been a fan of his 4GW theory, but this PowerPoint rebuke is great. Can we get this in slide format?:D

Finally, what we all instinctively knew to be true has been broken down by the numbers and explained in a methodical, detailed rebuke by someone who once wore rank on his collars that many of us associated with an inability to think rationally or use common sense. I wonder if anyone will listen.

I have long held that we should make bootlegged copies of PowerPoint available to al-Qaeda and give them free computers and projectors to use it, so that their internal processes can be crippled as much as ours have.

However, I also agree with Hammes narrow points about how PowerPoint can also be useful. That is generally the only means that I have ever employed slides for (unless ordered to do otherwise). I've always used slides in the same way that one would use an instructional video or supplemented an oral brief with charts and tables in the same way that one would supplement a research paper with charts and tables. Making the slides the focus of the presentation generally occurs when the speaker has nothing worthwhile to say - unfortunately, slides usually are the focus.

jmm99
07-13-2009, 01:22 AM
More verbosely,

Is the tool (PowerPoint) the problem; or is the process (one hammer wielder striking all the nails on his floor - and all the nails on the floors below) the problem ?


(from TXH)
The last point, how we make decisions, is the most obvious. Before PowerPoint, staffs prepared succinct two- or three-page summaries of key issues. The decision-maker would read a paper, have time to think it over and then convene a meeting with either the full staff or just the experts involved to discuss the key points of the paper. Of course, the staff involved in the discussion would also have read the paper and had time to prepare to discuss the issues. In contrast, today, a decision-maker sits through a 20-minute PowerPoint presentation followed by five minutes of discussion and then is expected to make a decision. Compounding the problem, often his staff will have received only a five-minute briefing from the action officer on the way to the presentation and thus will not be well-prepared to discuss the issues. This entire process clearly has a toxic effect on staff work and decision-making.
....
PowerPoint has clearly decreased the quality of the information provided to the decision-maker, but the damage doesn’t end there. It has also changed the culture of decision-making. In my experience, pre-PowerPoint staffs prepared two to four decision papers a day because that’s as many as most bosses would accept. These would be prepared and sent home with the decision-maker and each staff member that would participate in the subsequent discussion. Because of the tempo, most decision-makers did not take on more than three or four a day simply because of the requirement to read, absorb, think about and then be prepared to discuss the issue the following day. As an added benefit for most important decisions, they “slept on it.”

PowerPoint has changed that. Key decision-makers’ days are now broken down into one-hour and even 30-minute segments that are allocated for briefs. Of particular concern, many of these briefs are decision briefs. Thus senior decision-makers are making more decisions with less preparation and less time for thought. Why we press for quick decisions when those decisions will take weeks or even months to simply work their way through the bureaucracy at the top puzzles me. One of the critical skills in decision making is making the decision cycle and method appropriate to the requirements. If a decision takes weeks or months to implement and will be in effect for years, then a more thoughtful process is clearly appropriate.

This brings me to the third major concern with PowerPoint’s impact on our decision process: Who makes the decisions? Because the PowerPoint culture allows decision-makers to schedule more briefs per day, many type-A personalities seek to do so. Most organizations don’t need more decisions made at higher levels. But to find more decisions to make, a type-A leader has to reach down to lower levels to find those decisions. The result is the wrong person is making decisions at the wrong level.

Is the last sentence the crux of the problem ?

Where (if at all) do the people who have to execute the decision fit into the process which TXH describes ?

Greyhawk
07-13-2009, 02:05 AM
Here's one he missed: within two weeks of a "problem" being identified (particularly if in the major media) you could bet every man woman and child in service will have viewed a PowerPoint presentation on the topic, as group or individually via email (talk about bandwidth abuse...). Problem solved!

But I come neither to praise or condemn the brief, rather to acknowledge its necessary evil...

Hammes is on target, but also cursing a hammer for people using it as a screwdriver. That's his choice of approach, a cautious one that avoids (beyond implying) placing blame where due. Much of what he describes (too many slides, too much data crammed onto one slide, etc.) is a mark of a bad briefer. From my experience, you could get away with that once. (The initial fault would lie with your boss, if he were between the briefer and the guy at the head of the table in the chain of command - and normally that's the case. But I digress...) And if 100% of the information shared is included in the briefing slides (vice "read aheads" or other more comprehensive documents) then again we have a problem for which PowerPoint is not to blame. Certainly if the problem persists (other than in the case of the occasional "rookie" briefer sent to learn a lesson 'the hard way') beyond a given commander's first few weeks in office (also when template, fonts, and background color are established) we must consider the staff itself at fault. :rolleyes:

My career began in the days of paper flip charts and overhead projectors - we don't want to go back. The woes of the PowerPoint ranger are real, but they precede the advent of the tool that (used properly - and it often is) reduces the burden.

If you really want to talk about a time-saving technological advancement that has quadrupled our workload and made ten things more difficult for every one simplified, let's discuss email. It's much easier now to make 10,000 people jump through hoops; the hoops themselves are unchanged.

Come to think of it, I served through the advent of the computer era, and can assure you while we're better off with them we have yet to figure out a way to use them to reduce workload. The opposite has occurred, certainly to the dismay of we then-young and naive fools who saw a brighter future ('89::wry: / '99::eek: / '09::o) Perhaps there are other great technological advancements for which this is equally (or as cruelly) true. But the technology is not to blame.

Greyhawk
07-13-2009, 03:05 AM
There were earlier programs, but for simplification this is how they were greeted "in the office":

Right: "Gosh, this Word program sure is a huge step up from the typewriter!"

Right: "Gosh, this PowerPoint program sure is a huge step up from overhead slides and erasable markers!"

Wrong: "Gosh,this PowerPoint program sure is a step up from a typewriter!"

Item three is wrong, but that does not make PowerPoint wrong. However, too many people accept item three as Gospel. Sadly, it isn't completely wrong, and that by itself would justify its continued misuse. Consider also that if a person who saw it as "right" or "good enough" was of sufficient rank, then it was indeed Gospel and couldn't possibly be wrong and certainly not from the POV of someone below. It was hardly an issue worth falling on one's sword - I mean that sincerely. Those young parish priests are now Bishops and Cardinals, and the Dogma is entrenched. (Incorporated in the larger scripture of staffwork as the pain that must periodically be quietly endured. Thou shalt sit in thy corner and color thy slides.)

The new Parish Priests are "digital natives", their unfamiliarity with the typewriter or the overhead slide gives me no hope they'll necessarily set things to right. (Though I'm not entirely without hope, they may indeed "discover" something that makes sense.)

Another layer of irony is that now one can fairly easily incorporate images in Word documents - and color printers (if hardcopy required) are the rule rather than the exception (excluding some tactical environments), but PowerPoint is still often used as substitute for a typewriter. Hammes is (correctly but IMHO circuitously) pointing all this out.

A last depressing thought - for a few years there were places where things were done right, but standardization and networked systems are quickly making them a thing of the past. (I'm probably well beyond the discussion of PowerPoint here...)

Spud
07-13-2009, 03:08 AM
If you really want to talk about a time-saving technological advancement that has quadrupled our workload and made ten things more difficult for every one simplified, let's discuss email. It's much easier now to make 10,000 people jump through hoops; the hoops themselves are unchanged.


I'd also argue that it prevents our generals from practicing "generalship." Before e-mail our bosses relied on briefs to gather their situational awareness and CONOPs/decision briefs on how to progress. It meant the staff were staff and doing the required work to ensure their boss was on the ball. Now my boss gets into work before light and goes home well after dark (often to log in remotely) and spends his days slaving over Outlook because everyone inside and outside is AOR sends him everything they think he should be clued into. It results in him making decisions and doing the staff work via outlook rather than through an informed staff process.

Some would argue that this is a good thing ... no staff to get in the road. I would counter that it means that the staff is continually playing catch-up or (even worse) finding other things to do to occupy its time.

If I was king for the day I'd disable every GO's e-mail account and let them get back to doing what they are getting paid for ... considering informed recommendations and making decisions.

Greyhawk
07-13-2009, 03:23 AM
Is the last sentence the crux of the problem ?

Where (if at all) do the people who have to execute the decision fit into the process which TXH describes ?

PowerPoint might facilitate the micro-manager's task, but doesn't create micro-managers where they didn't exist before. I was a bit perplexed at that point. The fault may be mine.

I wonder if the author really does hold PowerPoint accountable for the wrongs of its users, or is merely being more circumspect (another trait of the military professional) than others would (me, f'rinstance) given the opportunity.

Greyhawk
07-13-2009, 03:32 AM
Now my boss gets into work before light and goes home well after dark

...and should he awake in the middle of the 4-hour night, BLACKBERRY!!!

Consider too: how many man-hours (I know, sexist) are wasted while X# people wait a half hour for the boss to finish a couple more hot emails (from his boss!!) before joining the group? I actually did have a private sit-down discussion with my boss on that topic once. Times five days a week X eternity it really adds up.

Entropy
07-13-2009, 04:34 AM
Greyhawk,

I agree with a lot of your points, but the article came across to me as a criticism of how powerpoint is used and not the program itself. As an intel guys who began with viewgraphs, MTF message traffic and thought "Harvard Graphics" was high-tech, I understand where you're coming from. Using the tool properly is key and I agree with pretty much everything the author says about its misuse.

Entropy
07-13-2009, 04:50 AM
I just remembered Tufte and his book on powerpoint. Here's an important excerpt. (http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0001yB)

Ken White
07-13-2009, 05:04 AM
War story. Decision brief to FORSCOM Cdr, three briefers. New high tech (then) computerized projector.. First briefer halfway through, black box breaks. Cdr says to the three COLS at the table, "No problem, you guys just talk me through it." Looks of stark panic. Much fumbling with paper copies of slides. Panic level increases when they realize they have their slides but no one else's while the Boss has all three sets. When the first one started talking, turned to call on his Briefer and El Commandante said "No, I want your thoughts on it." the panic was replaced by three looks of sheer terror. It sort of went downhill from there. Very entertaining for all us horse holders along the wall... :wry:

I'm not a T.X. Hammes fan but he's right on the money with that one, particularly on the decision levels broached -- as is Greyhawk with the perils of top level e-mail.

MikeF
07-13-2009, 05:11 AM
War story. Decision brief to FORSCOM Cdr, three briefers. New high tech (then) computerized projector.. First briefer halfway through, black box breaks. Cdr says to the three COLS at the table, "No problem, you guys just talk me through it." Looks of stark panic. Much fumbling with paper copies of slides. Panic level increases when they realize they have their slides but no one else's while the Boss has all three sets. When the first one started talking, turned to call on his Briefer and El Commandante said "No, I want your thoughts on it." the panic was replaced by three looks of sheer terror. It sort of went downhill from there. Very entertaining for all us horse holders along the wall... :wry:

I'm not a T.X. Hammes fan but he's right on the money with that one, particularly on the decision levels broached -- as is Greyhawk with the perils of top level e-mail.

Word. Talent not rank :)

v/r

Mike

Greyhawk
07-13-2009, 06:24 AM
Greyhawk,

... but the article came across to me as a criticism of how powerpoint is used and not the program itself.

Para two: "Make no mistake, PowerPoint is not a neutral tool — it is actively hostile to thoughtful decision-making. It has fundamentally changed our culture by altering the expectations of who makes decisions, what decisions they make and how they make them. While this may seem to be a sweeping generalization, I think a brief examination of the impact of PowerPoint will support this statement."

Then he goes on to explain its abuse and misuse, which - were it not for that initial polite caveat of a thesis statement - some might mistakenly interpret as an attack on those who are doing so. I suspect his point is as you say it is - his arguments clearly lead me to that conclusion - and that's a point with which we'd all agree (but with which many - or someone? - might be highly offended).

I don't think we need worry about an outright ban. The more likely solution is a PowerPoint in every inbox explaining the right and wrong uses of PowerPoint. :rolleyes:

Greyhawk
07-13-2009, 06:56 AM
If I knew how to upload this as a text-only powerpoint slide, I would. :p

I once prepared a briefing consisting only of eight graphs, each on it's own slide. All were needed to present the information I had to (by commander's "request") convey. (I am a HUGE fan of brevity and briefing the commander was a daily job, not a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.)

Upon review it was declared "too long", a problem I was told could be easily fixed: present two graphs per slide. Took me 30 seconds to fix, eight slides became four (no, the length of the briefing did not change), and everyone was happy.

I'm glad I didn't start with four slides.

Spud
07-13-2009, 07:12 AM
I'm glad I didn't start with four slides.

Ah but then you could have done the now-ubiquitous quad-slide and got away with a one-slide deck (oh hang on you'd need an extra one to give your name and a security classification and then another to ask whether there's any question's because you'd be incapable of doing wither of those things yourself.

The common acceptance of the quad-slide was that specific point in time that anthropologists will be able to say we hit PowerPoint stupidity :D

Greyhawk
07-13-2009, 07:33 AM
Bah - some bright young up-and-comer will soon make a name for himself for conceiving of the Ocho. :eek:


Very entertaining for all us horse holders along the wall...

Blood would flow from the bite marks on my inner cheeks that day. Thankfully we eventually discovered a device called an "E4" that sets such things to right in no time flat. Without one of those in your kit, you are doomed.

Tom Odom
07-13-2009, 08:11 AM
First of all everyone will have to wear--excuse me let me execute writing that in Power Point--it will be mandatory that while executing Power Point operations, all service members must display a reflective belt in order to prevent excessive exchange of original thought. SMs must also excute eye protective operations wearing approved darkened ballistic glasses or goggles in order to avoid displaying utter optical dismay as in confusion, terror, or tears...:wry:

Schmedlap
07-13-2009, 10:38 AM
Forgive the link to my own site, but I could not resist.

A PowerPoint Briefing About Why PowerPoint is Bad for Briefing (http://www.schmedlap.com/Archive.aspx)

Red Rat
07-13-2009, 11:16 AM
It must be heresy. :eek: Why else would the UK mil network I work on bar me from Schmedlap's powerpoint presentation? There goes my chance to subvert a new generation of staff officers :D:D

Fuchs
07-13-2009, 11:46 AM
I wrote many powerpoint files and held dozens of presentations.

It's not inherently bad, it's really about the people.


The one thing that is certainly bad is the emphasis that some people have on nice graphics, corporate design, badges, insignia and other non-information content of the slides. A simple, eye-pleasing background fading from strong colour top left to light colour bottom right and an indication about the source/author on every slide is enough. Advanced decorations as in medieval bibles is simply waste of resources and distracting.

Tom Odom
07-13-2009, 11:50 AM
Forgive the link to my own site, but I could not resist.

A PowerPoint Briefing About Why PowerPoint is Bad for Briefing (http://www.schmedlap.com/Archive.aspx)

That was an execellent execution of a briefing in order to provide an explanation of proper utilization of Power Point :wry:

PS

It was observed by me that a failure was executed by you, however, to provide an explicatory bullet in front of the paragraph on slide nine in order to fully meet proper Power Point Ranger standards :eek:

Entropy
07-13-2009, 12:50 PM
Para two: "Make no mistake, PowerPoint is not a neutral tool — it is actively hostile to thoughtful decision-making. It has fundamentally changed our culture by altering the expectations of who makes decisions, what decisions they make and how they make them. While this may seem to be a sweeping generalization, I think a brief examination of the impact of PowerPoint will support this statement."

Then he goes on to explain its abuse and misuse, which - were it not for that initial polite caveat of a thesis statement - some might mistakenly interpret as an attack on those who are doing so. I suspect his point is as you say it is - his arguments clearly lead me to that conclusion - and that's a point with which we'd all agree (but with which many - or someone? - might be highly offended).

I don't think we need worry about an outright ban. The more likely solution is a PowerPoint in every inbox explaining the right and wrong uses of PowerPoint. :rolleyes:

Yeah, I noticed that and just saw it as a rhetorical vehicle to make his point and maybe grab a few more readers with the opening paragraphs.


Schmelap,


Forgive the link to my own site, but I could not resist.

A PowerPoint Briefing About Why PowerPoint is Bad for Briefing


That's excellent, but what I really wanted is a decision brief on whether future decision briefs will continue to use Powerpoint XP or 2007. Also, I didn't like the color scheme or fonts - in the future please use a hot pink background with yellow lettering in comic sans to aid readability. :D

Hacksaw
07-13-2009, 02:06 PM
As a former planner... who wound up spending his last four years in uniform and first two in suit and tie working in and supporting the institutional army (e.g. TRADOC)... I can assure you the worst abuses of PowerPoint are committed in Garrison...

An example... I had built a three slide step through of how Army operational concepts had evolved from Air Land to Full Spectrum... complete with graphics that highlighted the differences and an assessment by BOS/WFF of how each differed...

The three slides were a complex, but impressive/useful aid when accompanied by a knowledgable briefer... and fortunately the senior officer for whom it was developed met that criteria... all was good with my world because there is a degree of satisfaction in helping in the process of communicating complex information in an intelligable manner...

Then my world changed when the senior leader I primarily supported was changed due to "TRANSFORMATION":eek:... the horror the horror...

The new Senior Leader was a trifecta... a moron, an ass, and a shameful plagerist... in other words he stole (I'm sorry incorporated the brief) into his base briefing.... the problem was that he couldn't brief it which led to questions that he couldn't answer that led to further questioning that became very uncomfortable...

The problem obviously was.... the slides....

The guidance... rework the slides so that three turns into one... and so that the slide "stands on its own" and doesn't require further clarification from the briefer....

I exagerate not...


So I try, but of course, its literally impossible... I can make the slides stand on their own in 6-7 slides, but not one... physics being what it is... combining three slides into one makes the slide more complex not simpler (but i digress)...

Thankfully, the previous senior leader (still in the organization) happened past my work station where he found me with head in hands... after I had explained the task and the previous iterations with the current moron in charge... he directed me to follow him and we marched directly across the street to my nemises office where he explained that the task assigned was not possible and that he'd be happy to write out the talking points he used in conveying the ideas contained in the slides...

As grateful as I was... I knew a tactical engagement had been won at the expense of my strategic reserve... the next 6 months were... arduous... until the next general in the chain of command decided to pull me onto his personal staff....

And what happened of the "Wanting Senior Leader"... he was placed in command of a lesser Divsion....

PowerPoint is not inherently evil... but in the hands of lesser intellects its downright lethal

Live well and row

Tom Odom
07-13-2009, 02:13 PM
Don't forget multiple builds for dramatic effect leading to a decision!

I once had a young author tell me --after I had taken his PPT show and turned it into a coherent article--that "power point" was "his canvas" and that he could not "work" in mere Word. :rolleyes:

Personally I believe CPOF and Google Earth have had similar effects on planning, assessments, and situational understanding but hey, I am a dinosaur. I still think one should be able to read a map and use a compass.

Tom

Entropy
07-13-2009, 02:23 PM
Don't forget multiple builds for dramatic effect leading to a decision!

I once had a young author tell me --after I had taken his PPT show and turned it into a coherent article--that "power point" was "his canvas" and that he could not "work" in mere Word. :rolleyes:

Personally I believe CPOF and Google Earth have had similar effects on planning, assessments, and situational understanding but hey, I am a dinosaur. I still think one should be able to read a map and use a compass.

Tom

That reminds me of the GPS Nav system our family bought about six months ago. I've noticed it made me lazy and dumb about how to get to different places since I didn't have to think about it, just follow along like a lemming (kind of like how my cell phone has made me lazy about remembering phone numbers). Now I only use the GPS on road trips to estimate time-of-arrival and to find specific stores/restaurants in unfamiliar terrain.

Jason Port
07-13-2009, 02:28 PM
In the spirit of not repeating what has all been said, the one hammer statement is on point. However, I am seeing the other Office tools be used in similar fashion. Access Databases and Excel files are being created because we have failed to keep systems up with the enemies pace. Excel is being used for funding because we don't know how to make work compute formulas. Microsoft designed each tool for a purpose, and the DoD has taken each and whored it to the maximum extent possible.

The most important thing we could do is demonstrate to commanders how Office could work effectively, and then enforce it. Imagine - read aheads in Word, briefings in PowerPoint, and computations in Excel - Incredible.

Steve Blair
07-13-2009, 02:36 PM
No kidding! Down at the ROTC level I've seen our staff meeting explode from a 2 page agenda under a previous commander (and that was for a meeting held roughly every 2-3 weeks) to a 37(!) slide "presentation" for a WEEKLY meeting. Of those 37 slides, at least half are repeats of information presented on another slide (often the one right before). We're at the point now where we have almost one slide for each cadet in the program (.74 slides for each cadet). Some weeks more time gets spent updating those slides than is spent planning or executing programs for the cadets....:mad:

What we've seen is a tool morphing into a process. Ppt no longer supports decisions in some cases, it BECOMES the decision as folks opt for the flashier presentation over actual content and substance. Then it turns into a game of who can cram the most bells and whistles into a ppt slide as opposed to using the slide to support actual discussion and comment. God forbid anyone actually thinks when the lights go down and the slides flash on the screen....

mikekuhn
07-13-2009, 02:56 PM
Another dangerous side effect of PowerPoint - not only are decisions being made from slides, units are sometimes expected to execute tasks from slides instead of receiving actual orders. I've seen this at the higher echelon staff level, and unfortunately participated in it myself. :(

Ken White
07-13-2009, 04:10 PM
In the spirit of not repeating what has all been said, the one hammer statement is on point. However, I am seeing the other Office tools be used in similar fashion. Access Databases and Excel files are being created because we have failed to keep systems up with the enemies pace. Excel is being used for funding because we don't know how to make work compute formulas. Microsoft designed each tool for a purpose, and the DoD has taken each and whored it to the maximum extent possible.I have seen METLs done in Excel :eek:

A sure indicator that the METL process has overtaken the reality of what it's supposed to do. GEN Chiarelli's article told folks but my suspicion is that Excel will continue to be used. :rolleyes:

That's just wrong. No unit needs that much specificity...:(

Schmedlap
07-13-2009, 06:26 PM
That's excellent, but what I really wanted is a decision brief on whether future decision briefs will continue to use Powerpoint XP or 2007.
That has been pushed to next quarter. You didn't get the slides showing the changes to the long-range calendar?

IntelTrooper
07-13-2009, 06:47 PM
I hate to add to the war stories, but since we're sharing...

Every week I had to update a set of PP slides which included, among other things, color-coding our relationship with our supported command (?!). I don't know, sir, but I think we're "Green" on pointless.

Tom Odom
07-14-2009, 03:45 AM
One other curiosity is the need to print read ahead and table slides for the group. I might understand read ahead slides if there was something to read and I especially love the use of embedded video and sound to make the main point--that really jumps out of a paper slide. :rolleyes:

As for table slides, the big guns get full color single frame; the lesser lights get double slides as an eye test. The non-players of course have to look at the damn screen--which is what everyone is supposed to do.

The tragedy in this is that it is killing written communications skills in the military and that in turn is killing verbal skills. I hear and see mission statements that are so garbled and jumbled with gerunds, passive voice, and useless helpers such as IOT (in order to --which means "to" and should be used sparingly for emphasis) that the actual mission gets lost.

A mission statement in passive voice with no "by whom"...from SAMS grads! :eek:

Schmedlap
07-14-2009, 05:24 AM
This reminds me of the mercifully short stint that I did as a staff weiner. I was doing IO plans for a TF and had a PA guy who worked with me. He seemed unclear on what exactly he should be briefing to the commander during the daily update brief. My advice to him to was to write a succinct summary of the days events and put it into a draft e-mail, just in case. By "succinct" I meant only those items that the commander would care about and only in the depth that would not lose his attention, meaning less than one page. Then, add in a few blurbs about other stuff in case he asks. Then, during the brief, tell him the gist of it. If he wants the full in-depth version, the go back to your laptop after the brief, open the draft, and press "send." IF you need a slide or two as a visual during the brief, to get the point across, then go ahead and use one. If you don't need it, then don't bother. There is no rule (at least that I'm aware of) that says you NEED to make a slide in order to brief something (at least not in that task force). I think he made a grand total of 3 slides in the 5 or 6 months that we worked together. If that had any impact on his NCOER, it could only have been positive.

I, on the other hand, used slides as a tool to keep people's attention. To many people, "IO" was just some weird staff billet that nobody knew much about that occasionally issued talking points. I had to not only brief the commander, but also educate the rest of the chain of command and staff. I was continually trying to convey what perceptions were out there among the populace, what this meant to us, and how to act upon them. But none of this is of any use if people don't pay attention or care. And when you're the 8th guy to brief out of a group of 10, people are not really in listening mode. So my slides were half content and half humor. After a month or so, you could actually see people kind of wake up and lean forward in their chairs when I began to stand up for my portion. Some of the humor may have been borderline unprofessional, much of it politically incorrect, but people paid attention and it helped me to get my points across and educate them. And the content on the slides really was necessary. Most people didn't even know what IO was prior to the deployment. I genuinely had to paint a picture for them.

davidbfpo
08-19-2009, 09:06 PM
An illustrated article 'The problem with PowerPoint' :http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8207849.stm and comes with nine slides.

davidbfpo

Infanteer
08-22-2009, 12:33 AM
This is an excellent thread, if for anything because it highlights the subtleties of how communications affect our ability to command and control units and soldiers.


Hammes is on target, but also cursing a hammer for people using it as a screwdriver. That's his choice of approach, a cautious one that avoids (beyond implying) placing blame where due. Much of what he describes (too many slides, too much data crammed onto one slide, etc.) is a mark of a bad briefer.


However, I am seeing the other Office tools be used in similar fashion. Access Databases and Excel files are being created because we have failed to keep systems up with the enemies pace. Excel is being used for funding because we don't know how to make work compute formulas. Microsoft designed each tool for a purpose, and the DoD has taken each and whored it to the maximum extent possible.

Agreed - having suffered through messing around with a 97 page ConOps brief and watching a very good LCol get caught up in silly little parts like the width of boxes left me with a bad taste in using power point for any part of operational planning process.

However, as a Platoon Commander, I utlize Powerpoint to good effect as a tool to bring out discussions on somewhat dry doctrine. Finding good images and videos brings a discussion on "Ambush/Counter-Ambush" alive. However, I try to leave out words to simply the key points, so that Privates and Corporals can remember the fundamentals.

The problem is when the program is abused. As Jason Port has highlighted, the entire suite of Microsoft Office is being pushed in a manner that simply creates nugatory staffwork (my new favorite word drawn from a Storr article). I've seen countless man-hours lost due to myself and my NCOs being caught up in filling Excel spreadsheets (my new nemesis) for tracking various things instead of training soldiers. Instead of being used for a simple calculation tool, it is used as a giant white board leaving the end user to sift through hundreds of cells to find the right ones to fill in (as opposed to simply saying "2 Pers have yet to submit their documentation....").


The most important thing we could do is demonstrate to commanders how Office could work effectively, and then enforce it. Imagine - read aheads in Word, briefings in PowerPoint, and computations in Excel - Incredible.

Yep - unfortunately all learning of essential computer programs to manage and plan within units is done by simply learning on one's own....


The tragedy in this is that it is killing written communications skills in the military and that in turn is killing verbal skills. I hear and see mission statements that are so garbled and jumbled with gerunds, passive voice, and useless helpers such as IOT (in order to --which means "to" and should be used sparingly for emphasis) that the actual mission gets lost.

A mission statement in passive voice with no "by whom"...from SAMS grads! :eek:

No kidding - I had "IOT" pushed into my head all throughout my training - "always remember the "IOT"!" The purpose was good - to have us all remember to explain why you're doing the friggin mission, but the IOT was simply fluff (the antithesis of good SD). My Company Commander has since beat IOT out of me with a red pen.

Michael C
08-29-2009, 06:17 AM
I could, and have written, pages on why powerpoint is the bane of Army existence. I have one point to show why it is unneccessary. The Taliban and Anti-Iraqi Forces have fought our coalitions in two countries to utter standstills. Yet, they don't have powerpoint, word or excel!

Rex Brynen
08-29-2009, 01:24 PM
I could, and have written, pages on why powerpoint is the bane of Army existence. I have one point to show why it is unneccessary. The Taliban and Anti-Iraqi Forces have fought our coalitions in two countries to utter standstills. Yet, they don't have powerpoint, word or excel!

Well, they certainly have and use Word and Excel, not to mention database programs and others. In the public domain, the CTC has done an excellent of using captured electronic records to tell us some interesting things about both AQ and Iraqi insurgents (http://ctc.usma.edu/harmony/harmony_menu.asp). Long may they continue to use it!

Schmedlap
08-29-2009, 02:38 PM
I could, and have written, pages on why powerpoint is the bane of Army existence. I have one point to show why it is unneccessary. The Taliban and Anti-Iraqi Forces have fought our coalitions in two countries to utter standstills. Yet, they don't have powerpoint, word or excel!
As early as OIF III, I recommended that we distribute bootlegged copies of PowerPoint, in hopes that the enemy would use it and become as paralyzed and bureaucratic as us. The means by which I recommended doing this was leaving 5 or 10 copies with each enemy cache of explosives and ammunition that we find (rather than destroying it). Emplace a team to overwatch the cache. If a guy comes out carrying a bag full of explosives, shoot him. If he comes out carrying copies of PowerPoint, then let him go! Unfortunately, my suggestion went nowhere.

Bill Moore
08-30-2009, 08:24 AM
If you have a blackbelt in powerpoint, intellect and the creativity of an artist you can use powerpoint to effectively project your story or points. If however you use powerpoint to dumb down a complicated subject to a few bullet statements which provide on context, then every ill thing said about powerpoint is true.

While I agree with Tom's comment about being able to read a map, there is a powerful new information technology emerging in knowledge management called visual analytics, which I think will take decision briefs to a new level. It allows the briefer (or staff) to present and manipulate volumes of complex data visually in way that permits the audience to grasp complex relations without hours of study.

Of course you'll have to have a graduate degree in this technology to effectively use it, but let's not trip over the mouse turds.

Ron Humphrey
08-30-2009, 08:41 PM
Of course you'll have to have a graduate degree in this technology to effectively use it, but let's not trip over the mouse turds.

And here I thought I might have it figured out and you go and point out how I'm not gettin it cause m not edumacated enough:(

Guess I'll just stick to drawin pretty pictures:D

Bill Moore
08-30-2009, 11:06 PM
The next step (I hope) is to simplify the user-software interface so the user doesn't have to be a software engineer, but rather an expert in his field that can use this software to effectively augment his/her analysis and ability to present the results.

http://nvac.pnl.gov/


“Seeing is knowing, though merely seeing is not enough. When you understand what you see, seeing becomes believing.”
~Pak Chung Wong, PNNL Scientist

I recommend reading the executive summary for Illuminating the Path: The Research and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics at the link below.

http://nvac.pnl.gov/agenda.stm

I know some of the more traditional among our members said to forget producing a better crystal ball in another forum, but with the proper use of science we can produce a "better" crystal ball, but we'll never produce a perfect one.

Back to powerpoint and where I think it may evolve to, let's face it powerpoint is a more powerful tool for presenting information than the old method of using boucher block or briefing off a sand table (though the sand table is still a requirement in my book). Unfortunately, like a lot of things the military touches it became stupid, and some idiots were more concerned with font size, style, back ground and the number of bullets on a particular slide, instead of encouraging their staff to use their imagination to find the best ways to "effectively" present their brief.

Spud
08-31-2009, 09:36 AM
some idiots were more concerned with font size, style, back ground and the number of bullets on a particular slide, instead of encouraging their staff to use their imagination to find the best ways to "effectively" present their brief.

To be fair though much have this has been in response to the idiots that think it is completely appropriate to populate a single slide with a complete OPORD. Fonts, the amount and type of information presented and the background it is on all impact on the reader/viewer's ability to comprehend the information being presented.

My concern with PowerPoint has always been that without firm guidance on what is appropriate (just like we have for other forms of official corro/writing etc) you get lunatics who think that progressing bullet at a time with a supporting sound effect to announce the entrance is best use of the program. That's what my son does in Grade 6 in his IT assignments ... how commissioned officers ever thought it was appropriate is beyond me.

The first thing I always do on entering an organisation is seek to simplify and then standardise a PowerPoint style manual ... I guarantee you the boss appreciates it far more than everyone considering the slide deck as their own palette. If this makes me a PowerPoint Nazi that spends too long on the small stuff I’m happy to take the moniker … If PowerPoint is meant to be a visual aid (and from my perspective that’s what it is – it supports the brief) and it doesn’t aid because everyone remains completely distracted by the format, style and randomness of the content we have failed to use the tool.

The real issue is the thought process among staffers who believe that PowerPoint is not formal correspondence ... you wouldn't prepare an OPORD with a cubist interpretation ... why the hell do we do it with presentations?

Eden
08-31-2009, 02:00 PM
From Army magazine, published about six years ago, an article on mastering powerpoint:


http://www3.ausa.org/webint/DeptArmyMagazine.nsf/byid/CCRN-6CCS9J

Bill Moore
08-31-2009, 05:35 PM
The first thing I always do on entering an organisation is seek to simplify and then standardise a PowerPoint style manual ...

Welcome to the industrial age, we're breaking new ground here. Ensure everyone puts their pencil in their left sleeve pocket, and that boot laces are left over right, and underwear is Army issue, standardization is the key to mass production and......

Hacksaw
08-31-2009, 06:24 PM
Well that's just the point isn't Bill...

When a picture really does paint a 1000 words, who wants to constrain the use of the picture...

Problem is that when we fail to include an "adult" in the loop to avoid the idiocy described by eden...

We get a hodgepodge of 100 MB briefings that actually cloud the leaders understanding as opposed to enlightening...

I'm not saying that Eden's approach is "fool-proof" only that it minimizes some forms of foolishness...

The better solution is a series of guidelines for staff officers to adhere to per SOP and that are deviated from as conscious decision... add in an XO/S3/CoS in the loop to "approve" deviations from the SOP...

To often when no constraints are placed on the use, junior "leaders" are apt to misguidedly go for the Wow Factor because they think it is a means to distinguish themselves from their peers...

The horror the horror:eek:

Live well and row

Bill Moore
09-01-2009, 12:55 AM
To often when no constraints are placed on the use, junior "leaders" are apt to misguidedly go for the Wow Factor because they think it is a means to distinguish themselves from their peers...

To be fair you and Spud have valid points, but while the young (or just immature and not so young) can abuse the bells and whistles which add nothing to the brief, and simply serve to confuse and eat up bandwidth, the SOP approach can be abused also. An OPORD brief is a standard brief, so SOP away; however, you can use powerpoint for much more than an OPORD brief. If you're attempting to explain a complex situation (information brief) they can be useful. I'll attempt to find an unclassified example.

Schmedlap
09-01-2009, 03:14 AM
To often when no constraints are placed on the use, junior "leaders" are apt to misguidedly go for the Wow Factor because they think it is a means to distinguish themselves from their peers...
In defense of we youngsters, I never encountered an O-3 staff officer (BDE or below) who seemed to care all that much about what the slide looked like. It was a shell with blanks that needed to be filled in with numbers, colors, shapes, and brevity codes. On the other hand, my Company Commander freaked out when I was a Platoon Leader and put together a slideshow (as ordered) to brief the BC on the conduct of a range. My faux pas? I did not include the brigade crest in the upper left of the master slide or the battalion crest in the upper right.:eek: Thankfully, I was not relieved. Later, when I was a junior CPT acting as S-3, a hypermotivated MAJ at BDE kicked back my QTB and Gunnery slides no less than a dozen times for purely cosmetic reasons (often demanding that I redo my previous undo). (I eventually got him back. My last act as S-3 was to RECLAMA the OPORD for deployment back to Iraq).


To be fair you and Spud have valid points, but while the young (or just immature and not so young) can abuse the bells and whistles which add nothing to the brief, and simply serve to confuse and eat up bandwidth...
Bandwidth. You got it. That was my peeve. In 2005, in a dusty patrol base in Iraq, I received an email that stated simply, "Download attached slides and comply immediately. Report when complete." This was from BDE, forwarded immediately by Bn. I thought, wow, sounds important. The slideshow was a zipped file, about 8 megabytes in size. When unzipped, it was outlandishly enormous. I had to kick everybody off of the internet so that my laptop could monopolize the bandwidth and download the file in under 40 minutes. Once I finally downloaded it and my worn out laptop strained to open the file, I found an 84-slide presentation (that's EIGHTY-FOUR) on how to inspect an AT-4 for serviceability. No ####. What Private doesn't learn this in basic training?

It was a digital photography extravaganza showing, step-by-step, how to check to ensure the sights are present and not broken and other apparently complicated things. The best part was that the date/time of the photos were in the lower right corner of each photo. The photos were taken over a 5 HOUR period. WTF? Some sorry staff weiner spent 5 hours snapping pictures to illustrate one of the simplest tasks in the skill level 1 manual. I am guessing that he spent another two hours putting the slides together, judging from the time that the file was saved.

Now, I've worked with some hypermotivated, overcaffeinated individuals in my day, but none had succumbed to this degree of masochism. Putting together this slideshow monstrosity could only have been the idea of somebody above O-3. I don't know how high up the rank structure one must go in order to think that this made any sense, but no CPT hates himself that much. It had to be at least a MAJ.

Hacksaw
09-01-2009, 01:53 PM
Bill first... I agree that an elegant powerpoint slide can in fact paint a 1000 words and when it does it should be employed that way... which is why I added the caveat that its OK to deviate from the guidelines but it should be done with eyes wide open and it should be the exception rather than the rule... I think we are in violent agreement

Schmedlap... I should have been clearer in my word usage... when I say junior leader I'm referring to a leader/commander briefing his superior... that extends all the way from SL to Div CDR... I also found the desire for WoW factor to go up as the responsibility for building the slide themselves went down... so again we are in violent agreement...

My experience is that when the senior leader sets the precedent that slides are...
1. Black and White
2. Max of 5 bullets per slide
3. No extraneous pictures/clip art

It may take some time but it allows folks to focus on content, and when they do "break the rules" its for a very good reason (e.g. painting a 1000 words)

Live well and row

Hacksaw
09-01-2009, 01:56 PM
the best use of powerpoint IMHO was the brief assembled by the young MI CPT (later died in combat) "How to Win in Anbar" or something close... simple and elegant... words amplified the pictures

Tukhachevskii
03-19-2010, 01:39 PM
the best use of powerpoint IMHO was the brief assembled by the young MI CPT (later died in combat) "How to Win in Anbar" or something close... simple and elegant... words amplified the pictures

How to win in Anbar (http://www.geardo.com/docs/how_to_win_in_anbar.pdf) by Cpt Travis Patriquin and the article Anbar Awakens: The Tipping Point (http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20080430_art0008.pdf) in Military Review (April 2008 in Archives; link appears to be snooty) that places it in context.

ptamas
03-19-2010, 02:38 PM
How to win in Anbar (http://www.geardo.com/docs/how_to_win_in_anbar.pdf) by Cpt Travis Patriquin and the article Anbar Awakens: The Tipping Point (http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20080430_art0008.pdf) in Military Review (April 2008 in Archives; link appears to be snooty) that places it in context.

the links don't work for me...is that because I'm outside?

marct
03-19-2010, 05:28 PM
the links don't work for me...is that because I'm outside?

Don't know, Peter. The first one works for me, but I get a file not found error on the second.....

Marc

Ken White
03-19-2010, 06:06 PM
LINK(.pdf) (http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20080430_art008.pdf).

Should work okay for both of you.

GI Zhou
03-19-2010, 10:35 PM
Powerpoint I find best for photos, video and maps. It is meant to assist and not take over from the presentation. The more the tricks the more poeple concentrate on what will happen next on the screen. The person giving the presentation is the focus, not the screen. Powerpoint poisoning is a condition that has to stop.

sullygoarmy
04-27-2010, 06:52 AM
NY Times Article on Powerpoint (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/world/27powerpoint.html?hp)

Some great quotes in here...and so true. I pull "storyboards" from nearly every event our Squadron does from IED hits to micro grants. The PLs and Troop Commanders sit there every day and build these slides so we can pass them on up.

In there defense, however, these storyboards may be the only slice of reality a staff officer at division or higher gets to see of operations on the ground. It also tells the story of what that platoon/troop is doing on a daily basis in a format that is quick and easy to read.

But they also are the bane of my existence. As the Operations Officer, I spend hours reviews, correcting and "tweaking" storyboards prior to release higher. This article really hits home.

Now back to making slides.

AdamG
04-28-2010, 03:28 PM
'When we understand that slide, we'll have won the war:' US generals given baffling PowerPoint presentation to try to explain Afghanistan mess
:confused:
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1269463/Afghanistan-PowerPoint-slide-Generals-left-baffled-PowerPoint-slide.html#ixzz0mPQb5ZPT

Cougfootballfan
04-28-2010, 09:09 PM
In my sqdn this needs to be hung in every office, we rely too much on powerpoint

Tukhachevskii
04-29-2010, 03:10 PM
...but I don't think powerpoint, if used correctly, is such a bad thing. As a dyslexic I am primarily a visual learner and retain images in my memory (and the text/presentation that goes with them) much better than I could through purely sitting down and listening to a presentation (and yes, I like books with pictures in them!:wry:). Given that most segments of the population can be divided into aural and visual learners you really need to hit the right balance. Even I cannot function if hit by too many slides in a ppt presentation. Its like most things, you need a balance.

Firn
04-29-2010, 05:08 PM
PPT makes a good box to tick off and gets abused in that way. It facilitates getting away with little thought. But it can be a powerful tool, weaving all supporting media into a solid spine.

Firn (who almost sounds now like bulleting his way through)

Back to my presentation :rolleyes:

Charles Martel
04-29-2010, 08:19 PM
Many on this forum have correctly identified that it is lazy thinking, not PowerPoint, that is the problem. PowerPoint is the symptom. The underlying problem is the way we train commanders to sit back and listen to watered down, consensus staff input then adjudicate between two relatively equal options (with a third, throw-away option included to be an easy kill). This gets great reviews at Staff College and our Training Centers, but does not comport with what works in the field, as we have seen for now almost 9 years.

What works there is commanders, who are out seeing the battlefield, who, frankly, know more about the enemy and friendly situation than most of the the staff in the TOC and are the most experienced Soldiers in their unit, developing the plans ICW the staff -- the staff can work through the details to make the plan work, but the successful Commanders have their fingerprints on the plan from the beginning. Not in a dictatorial way that stifles good ideas, but in a positive, focused way that puts the onus on the commander to lead.

Somehow we have come to a process that rewards commanders who sit back waiting to be "fed." Let the staff churn, burn long hours, then hang it out there for the commander to chop off when the commander should have had an idea of what he was looking for before the staff began.

We teach a process tailor-made for PowerPoint and all the attendant problems. The more time the staff puts into fancy builds, transition effects and extraneous sounds, the more some recipients like it -- despite the debilitating effect of those non-value-added features have on the other things that the staff should be doing -- which includes sleeping.

Scapegoating PowerPoint misses the real problem. The problems are our planning and thinking processes that stifle discussion and thought.

William F. Owen
05-04-2010, 10:57 AM
Scapegoating PowerPoint misses the real problem. The problems are our planning and thinking processes that stifle discussion and thought.

Not scapegoats, but the guilty! (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article7114479.ece)

I'll admit to this making me extremely angry. How does this twaddle get any amount of serious consideration. Please just read the explanation. It this is what "Systems thinking" gets you, it's more worthless than I realised, when applied to warfare.

marct
05-04-2010, 01:19 PM
Hey Wilf,


I'll admit to this making me extremely angry. How does this twaddle get any amount of serious consideration. Please just read the explanation. It this is what "Systems thinking" gets you, it's more worthless than I realised, when applied to warfare.

Personally, the only major problem I've ever had with systems theory is its serious limitations. When the two are combined in a ppt, however, there are some problems ;). Did you notice that Moynihan stated:


Unlike linear thinking, the default mode of the human brain, system dynamics thinks about repercussions and occasionally unintended consequences of actions.

That's an interesting assumption, that the default mode of thought is linear, and I don't believe it is borne out by the data. It may be the situationally appropriate default mode (by training), but it isn't the default for the species, and this has some implications for the use, comprehension and value of systems thinking.

For one thing, systems theory operates in a minimum of 4 dimensions (go back to von Bertalenffy (http://www.amazon.com/General-System-Theory-Foundations-Applications/dp/0807604534/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272978646&sr=8-1)), but powerpoint rarely is able to present more than 3. When we are dealing with interacting human systems, each node (person) is also input and output capable and, just to make things interesting, is totally able to construct almost any picture of their operating environment that they wish. We can probabilistically "predict" patterns, and make interpretations based on those predictions, but they aren't a "vision of the future". Unfortunately, powerpoint presentations have a biasing effect that influences how what is presented is interpreted (from a probabilistic to a predictive).

To my mind, systems theory is OK, as far as it goes, but it has some serious limitations that are exacerbated by powerpoint. Just my $.02 :D

Cheers,

Marc

ps. Wilf, love the FB rant against the overuse of "complexity"!

William F. Owen
05-04-2010, 01:50 PM
To my mind, systems theory is OK, as far as it goes, but it has some serious limitations that are exacerbated by powerpoint. Just my $.02 :D

Systems Theory may be OK, but it seems to fall down in Warfare. The real issue with the slide is that it presented no insight and added no value. What it really said (as with people saying Complex) is that those looking at the problem do not understand it.
Ignorance or unfamiliarity, does not make something "complex" or anything like that which the slide attempted to portray.


ps. Wilf, love the FB rant against the overuse of "complexity"!
Seems to upset some people, but I guess it's complicated.... :wry:

Dayuhan
05-04-2010, 02:20 PM
Systems Theory may be OK, but it seems to fall down in Warfare.

Is that a problem with Systems Theory specifically, or a more general issue with transitions between theory and practice?

William F. Owen
05-04-2010, 03:04 PM
Is that a problem with Systems Theory specifically, or a more general issue with transitions between theory and practice?
Excellent question!!! There IMO, a huge disparity between what people theorise about warfare and what people do in practice.

As concerns system theory, having read "Pursuit of Excellence (http://www.amazon.com/Pursuit-Military-Excellence-Evolution-Operational/dp/0714642770)," and read about it else where, it seems to add nothing and in fact makes things more complicated than could ever be useful. IMO, it does not aid understanding

Umar Al-Mokhtār
05-04-2010, 05:13 PM
Mr Moynihan was just being a tad bit condescending. He meant: unlike linear thinking, the default mode of the military brain, we much smarter civilians utilize system dynamics which thinks about repercussions and occasionally unintended consequences of actions.…

But he also realizes which side of the toast the butter is on. :D

marct
05-04-2010, 05:17 PM
Mr Moynihan was just being a tad bit condescending. He meant: unlike linear thinking, the default mode of the military brain, we much smarter civilians utilize system dynamics which thinks about repercussions and occasionally unintended consequences of actions.…

But he also realizes which side of the toast the butter is on. :D

Aaaah! Got it! He was dancing in circles rather than getting to the point :eek::D!!!!

Umar Al-Mokhtār
05-04-2010, 05:23 PM
The 'Power' Point!!!! :D

Perhaps if PA Consulting did a few spiffy slides describing exactly how linear thinking differs from system dynamics we could all be illuminated.

Oh, some snazzy sounds and cool animations too! :p

Some imbedded video as well.

And a really dark colored background since they eat up the most toner when printed. :eek:

marct
05-04-2010, 05:36 PM
LOL!

You know, I wonder if this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02-ZtkVOtlM&feature=related) was one of his ancestors :eek::D?

Umar Al-Mokhtār
05-04-2010, 05:39 PM
They have "talking pictures" now! Wow! I'm guessing that spells doom for the Interwebs, oh and the silent film industry too. :D

Fuchs
05-13-2010, 10:59 AM
"Afghanistan Stability Chart" by the Daily how with Jon Stewart (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-april-29-2010/afghanistan-stability-chart)

Jedburgh
08-28-2010, 03:15 AM
24 Aug 10: Outside View: PowerPoints 'R' Us (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=upiUPI-20100823-112700-2345&show_article=1)

I have been assigned as a staff officer to a headquarters in Afghanistan for about two months. During that time, I have not done anything productive. Fortunately little of substance is really done here, but that is a task we do well.

We are part of the operational arm of the International Security Assistance Force commanded by U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus. It is composed of military representatives from all the NATO countries, several of which I cannot pronounce.

Officially, IJC was founded in late 2009 to coordinate operations among all the regional commands in Afghanistan. More likely it was founded to provide some general a three-star command. Starting with a small group of dedicated and intelligent officers, IJC has successfully grown into a stove-piped and bloated organization, top-heavy in rank. Around here you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a colonel.

For headquarters staff, war consists largely of the endless tinkering with PowerPoint slides to conform with the idiosyncrasies of cognitively challenged generals in order to spoon-feed them information. Even one tiny flaw in a slide can halt a general's thought processes as abruptly as a computer system's blue screen of death.....
27 Aug 10: Colonel Kicked Out of Afghanistan for Anti-PowerPoint Rant (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/08/anti-powerpoint-rant-gets-colonel-kicked-out-of-afghanistan/)

Consider it a new version of death by PowerPoint. The NATO command in Afghanistan has fired a staff officer who publicly criticized its interminable briefings, its over-reliance on Microsoft’s slide-show program, and what he considered its crushing bureaucracy.

Army Col. Lawrence Sellin, a 61-year old reservist from New Jersey who served in Afghanistan and Iraq prior to this deployment, got the sack Thursday from his job as a staff officer at the International Security Assistance Force Joint Command in Kabul. The hammer fell barely 48 hours after United Press International ran a passionate op-ed he wrote to lament that “little of substance is really done here.” He tells Danger Room, “I feel quite rather alone here at the moment.”.....

carl
08-28-2010, 01:59 PM
COL Sellin is my hero for the day. And he is a clever writer too.

Ken White
08-28-2010, 04:15 PM
COL Sellin is my hero for the day. And he is a clever writer too.Note the solution to the actual problems he cites won't get fixed and that he gets fired and a wrist slap for doing what's right.

Sad...

jmm99
08-28-2010, 07:09 PM
if you read past this (from article):


Army Col. Lawrence Sellin, a 61-year old reservist from New Jersey who served in Afghanistan and Iraq prior to this deployment, got the sack Thursday from his job as a staff officer at the International Security Assistance Force Joint Command in Kabul.

to this (near end):


Sellin is going to head home to Finland, where he’s worked for the past several years for an information-technology company that he asks me not to name.

Sellin has written a number of pieces for UPI (http://www.upi.com/search/?sp=t&s_l=articles&ss=%22Lawrence+Sellin%22&s_term=ea) - note the Helsinki and Finland byline on many of them.

So, Sellin is a Finlander - at least by choice of residence (I've no idea as to ancestry - Sellin is a Finnish family name).

As Carl knows (from flying the exotic regions of Northern Michigan), Finlanders are not known for their love of "pullsit" - except as applied to the back 40 for fertilizer.

Thus, all is explained. :D

Cheers

Mike

Tracker275
08-30-2010, 07:36 AM
On Powerpoint...

In light of all previous comments....All I have to say on Powerpoint is that it has most definitely been the demise of the quality of Intelligence products.

I miss a few years ago when I would get an INTSUM (Intelligence Summary), which has now been replaced by a GRINTSUM (Graphical Intelligence Summary). With the invention of the GRINTSUM, not only intelligence products, but the Patrol Debriefs have simply become a storyboard that encompasses half a slide that represents where on the map the unit was. Last I checked, the Commander already knows where the unit was. The Commander doesn't need to know where his infantry platoon was through the use of a map on Powerpoint that takes up at least half of the entire storyboard/patrol debrief. If he does, then he is "lost in the sauce", and doesn't know what his unit is doing, or where they are going. Not to mention, a true Patrol Debrief is not doctrinally a Powerpoint slide in either the US military or even NATO.

Yes, pictures are "1,000 words", however when the pictures tell you less than the "1,000 words", it is time to step back for a moment.

Not only that, too many Commanders do not want to see "NSTR" (No Status to Report) on their GRINTSUM's.

Well, Sir...If there is nothing to report, then there is nothing to report. By ordering that "NSTR" is not allowed on an intelligence report, you are only prompting intellegence professionals to generate information (not intelligence) that really is of no use to anyone.

Honestly, if the intel shop is telling you that there is "NSTR", then maybe it is time to stop sending troops and intelligence collection assets to a place or activity that continually produces "NSTR" information. Or, what happens is that the same information continually gets reported day-in, and day-out. Hence, why many analysts and others get to where they will just hit the "Delete" button on their keyboard when the 20megabyte file drops into their inbox. They know there won't be anything new on it, and besides...their email inbox is only 30megabytes so all it does is fill it up so they can't receive information that is the "hear-and-now" from someone else.

Unfortunately, by ordering the ban on "NSTR" in reporting, you are only generating false reporting in that the intelligence analysts have to "create" something from nothing, which in turn...turns into a combat zone based on fictional reporting.

Currently, we are teaching students in the All-Source Analyst Course (35F) the GRINTSUM, and discarding what is actually written in doctrinal publications on how to report intellegence to commanders. During the 10-day FTX here at Fort Huachuca, we spend more time on the students learning how to be "Powerpoint Rangers" than actual intelligence analysis. It is nothing for the students to spend an hour and a half just preparing the CIU to brief, which typically does not yield enough information to really give the Commander a true sense of his COP. Instead of the students learning how to write intelligence reporting, they spend more time on trying to be able to graphically represent what is on the various slides. This last class, I can't tell you how many times I had to try and pound into their heads the simple concept of presenting "Bottom-Line-Up-Front" (BLUF) reporting where the first sentence answered the "5W's". They honestly do not know how to do that, and after 4-months of training, we end up having to teach them just how to write intelligence that is useful to not only Commanders, but the rest of the intelligence community.

Through the use of Powerpoint to produce intelligence products, there are several issues that come about.

First, most of the GRINTSUM's are too big to even be transmitted through email to some elements that are in remote areas.

Second, if you didn't sit through the brief, there is information that was presented on what was in the brief that is not displayed in text somewhere. So, if you weren't in the brief, you are looking at a slide with pretty pictures, and really don't know what the content was that is trying to make a point.

Thirdly, Powerpoint is like the old school slide show. So, the point is that the "highlights" are presented graphically, and the briefer fills in the rest of the details. By doing this, all that is said by the briefer is lost when it is posted to a website, and someone from another unit looks at it. They are missing the additional details that are part of what was briefed, which are no longer included in any form to those that are no where near the briefing room.

The GRINTSUM is perfectly fine to brief the Commander during a their CUB/CIU brief. However, it absolutely does not replace what the doctrinal concept behind what an INTSUM produces.

Solution: Produce the GRINTSUM, but do not neglect the publication of an INTSUM, which can be put in small kilobyte size files able to be be sent to troops in remote areas with all of the details that they were unable to hear in a brief they were unable to attend.

Unfortuntely, the doctrinal INTSUM that is referenced so many times in Army FM's is no longer taught, or tested on. This is particularly the case when they go do their 10-day FTX.

jmm99
08-30-2010, 05:23 PM
seems to be the bottom line; or, the product is for the "first army" and not the "second army" - to take a quote from the Centurions via Gian Gentile (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=39098&postcount=11) in another context:


I'd like to have two armies: one for display, with lovely guns, tanks, little soldiers, fanfares, staffs, distinguished and doddering generals and dear little regimental officers...

The other would be the real one, composed entirely of young enthusiasts in camouflaged battle dress, who would not be put on display, but from whom impossible efforts would be demanded and to whom all sorts of tricks would be taught. That's the army in which I should like to fight.

It strikes me that the "second army" would need and appreciate the INTSUMs.

I'm a proponent of visual aids (repeat: aids) in what I've done and do. When the "aids" in a system supplant the substance, that system has a real problem.

Googling GRINTSUM yields only 43 hits (just now) - a well kept secret, it seems.

Regards

Mike

Cavguy
08-30-2010, 05:59 PM
Solution: Produce the GRINTSUM, but do not neglect the publication of an INTSUM, which can be put in small kilobyte size files able to be be sent to troops in remote areas with all of the details that they were unable to hear in a brief they were unable to attend.

Unfortuntely, the doctrinal INTSUM that is referenced so many times in Army FM's is no longer taught, or tested on. This is particularly the case when they go do their 10-day FTX.

Every unit I've been in (Tactical BN and BDE), including the one I'm in now, still produces a full INTSUM daily in combat ops, with all the appropriate content. We just produced a series in our latest WFX/FSX. I even have my S2 shop producing a weekly OSINTSUM on our projected AO to stay in practice. Not sure which units have abandoned the INTSUM, news to me.

jmm99
08-30-2010, 07:02 PM
in the "second army" has spoken. Niel's posting is comforting on that score.

We have 96°F in Hancock today - we will pay for that in a couple of months, together with those living to the north of us (including transplanted SC folk). Then, Niel, you can add snow data to your INTSUMs. :)

Regards

Mike

charlyjsp
09-07-2010, 07:01 AM
Most of you won't be able to read it (and google translate has a few kinks to work out in Fin --> Eng translations), but Col. Sellin posted a little over forty posts from July onwards on Ilta-sanomat's website (one of two 'afternoon' papers published in Finland). From the first posts onwards I surprised at how open he was - good stuff, and certainly a useful perspective for many people in Finland to hear/read. Obviously that gig is also done, last post being Sept 7.

http://blogit.iltasanomat.fi/afganistan/

-Charly

davidbfpo
09-07-2010, 07:15 AM
charlyjsp,

Are the Finnish articles the same as those JMM found a week ago?
Sellin has written a number of pieces for UPI - note the Helsinki and Finland byline on many of them.

Link:http://www.upi.com/search/?sp=t&s_l=articles&ss=%22Lawrence+Sellin%22&s_term=ea

Scott Shaw
09-07-2010, 09:43 PM
I just finished our ppt based training meeting that is backed by both written training schedules and a written OSINTSUM. Our S2 shop does it every week to support what they brief @ the training meeting and I have to agree with Niel, it keeps them sharp - and lets the PLs get something from a meeting that is more than a graphic without discussion.

Scott

jmm99
09-08-2010, 02:17 AM
From the Finnish post, 15 minuuttia valokeilassa (http://blogit.iltasanomat.fi/afganistan/15-minuuttia-valokeilassa/), 31.8.2010 Kirjoittaja: Eversti_L [we'd say "15 mins of fame" - valokeilassa = lit. "in the spotlight"; Kirjoittaja = author; Eversti_L = Colonel L.; end Finglish exercise], this comment:


M.R. says:
2.9.2010 klo 15:51
We brief our lives away… The real significance of the everlasting row of all the meaningless PP presentations is to deter us from seeing what is really happening around us. If not forced to attend to constant meetings strengthening the collective values of the company, we might start questioning too many things. This is one of the definitives of our era, the plague that transforms employees into soldiers for their companies, and soldiers into company-workers having a false sense of influence in their company’s politics.

Too many extreme Managerial types (i.e., as described in Brian Linn's Echo of Battle (http://www.amazon.com/Echo-Battle-Armys-Way-War/dp/0674026519)) in both the corporate and military worlds ?

Regards

Mike

charlyjsp
09-08-2010, 12:11 PM
charlyjsp,

Are the Finnish articles the same as those JMM found a week ago?

Link:http://www.upi.com/search/?sp=t&s_l=articles&ss=%22Lawrence+Sellin%22&s_term=ea

I looked over the UPI articles and the blog posts. There is overlap, but there seems to be unique material on both sites - makes sense, especially the posts where Col. Sellin is responding to Finnish readers' questions or more directly addressing Finns.

-Charly

AdamG
03-03-2011, 01:22 PM
Warning : clear all liquids from your work station before proceeding and for Heaven's sake, don't have a mouthful of anything. That is all.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/09/army-colonel-fired-for-powerpoint-rant-090210w/?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4d6c7c999aee45ba,1


For headquarters staff, war consists largely of the endless tinkering with PowerPoint slides to conform with the idiosyncrasies of cognitively challenged generals in order to spoon-feed them information. Even one tiny flaw in a slide can halt a general’s thought processes as abruptly as a computer system’s blue screen of death.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmjHT5GpAYQ

stanleywinthrop
03-03-2011, 05:23 PM
Next month, IJC will attempt a giant leap for mankind. In a first-of-its-kind effort, IJC will embed a new stovepipe into an already existing stovepipe. The rationale for this bold move resides in the fact that an officer, who is currently without one, needs a staff of 35 people to create a big splash before his promotion board .

J Wolfsberger
03-04-2011, 01:22 PM
That is one of the more unorthodox letters of resignation I've seen. :eek:

AdamG
03-04-2011, 02:17 PM
That is one of the more unorthodox letters of resignation I've seen. :eek:

It makes me wonder if the good Colonel broke the teacup too -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRPDO63rI1E

He'd better hope his plane home doesn't do a left turn into Gitmo.
"Your new name in Number Six...."

jmm99
03-04-2011, 05:00 PM
took a right turn ... to Helsinki. :)

That is where one of his op-ed outlets (Ilta-Sanomat (http://blogit.iltasanomat.fi/afganistan/)) has had much the same content as his UPI columns - source: our Man in Helsinki :cool:, charlylsp, Finnish language blog by Col. Sellin (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=106207&postcount=80).

His 64 columns for UPI (http://www.upi.com/search/?sp=t&s_l=articles&ss=%22Lawrence+Sellin%22&s_term=ea), start 13 Mar 2004 (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Outside-View/2004/03/13/Outside-View-FBI-behind-the-anthrax-curve/UPI-75081079206740/) (1st Astan column, 28 Sep 2004 (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Outside-View/2004/09/28/Outside-View-Warfare-in-Afghanistan/UPI-70811096392265/)). His columns from the month before and the month of the sack (his 2d Astan tour) seem rational enough.


Afghanistan status check (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Outside-View/2010/07/08/Outside-View-Afghanistan-status-check/UPI-85811278583500/)
KABUL, Afghanistan, July 8 (UPI) -- I have been in-country about one week, enough time for some initial impressions.

Cynical thoughts about Afghanistan (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Outside-View/2010/07/15/Outside-View-Cynical-thoughts-about-Afghanistan/UPI-11561279189080/)
KABUL, Afghanistan, July 15 (UPI) -- Will the epitaph of the war in Afghanistan be motion without progress and knowledge without wisdom?

Afghanistan's tribal trouble (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Outside-View/2010/07/22/Outside-View-Afghanistans-tribal-trouble/UPI-50621279794000/)
KABUL, Afghanistan, July 22 (UPI) -- Former CIA Director Richard Helms counseled that when dealing with societies in and around the Middle East, pay attention to the things that are hundreds of years old -- the religious sects, the clans, the tribes.

Battle of Barg-e-Matal (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Outside-View/2010/07/29/Outside-View-Battle-of-Barg-e-Matal/UPI-74371280399880/)
KABUL, Afghanistan, July 29 (UPI) -- If the battle of Barg-e-Matal ever goes down in history, I am not sure if it will be treated as a victory or a defeat or a tragedy or a comedy.

Is Pakistan the enemy in Afghanistan? (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Outside-View/2010/08/05/Outside-View-Is-Pakistan-the-enemy-in-Afghanistan/UPI-22011281014048/)
KABUL, Afghanistan, Aug. 5 (UPI) -- Each day between 25 and 50 Afghan civilians, Afghan, coalition and American soldiers are wounded or killed by the Taliban.

North, the new front in the Afghan war (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Outside-View/2010/08/12/Outside-View-North-the-new-front-in-the-Afghan-war/UPI-20041281609300/)
KABUL, Afghanistan, Aug. 12 (UPI) -- A recently released U.N. report states that 1,271 Afghans died and 1,997 were injured in the first six months of this year. Three-quarters of these casualties were caused by Taliban forces, mostly from roadside bombings.

Afghanistan’s last, best hope (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Outside-View/2010/08/19/Outside-View-Afghanistans-last-best-hope/UPI-25841282215600/)
KABUL, Afghanistan, Aug. 19 (UPI) -- The real enemy in Afghanistan is reactionary leadership represented by corrupt politicians, ruthless warlords and the twisted religious extremism of the Taliban.

Colonel (Eversti) Sellin would not get along well with the detained folks at Gitmo (from the "Battle-of-Barg-e-Matal" piece):


The immediate task is to destroy the Taliban's capability to wage an insurgency. That means, first and foremost, to defeat them decisively in the field.

Simultaneously we must isolate them nationalistically, culturally and religiously from the Afghan people. The Taliban are invaders and murderers, who are religious extremists, who don't respect Afghan tribal traditions and who possess foreign pan-Islamic ambitions not in tune with the needs and desires of the Afghan people.

(and from the "North, the new front in the Afghan war" piece):


KABUL, Afghanistan, Aug. 12 (UPI) -- A recently released U.N. report states that 1,271 Afghans died and 1,997 were injured in the first six months of this year. Three-quarters of these casualties were caused by Taliban forces, mostly from roadside bombings.

The Taliban has also continued its practice of carrying out brutal atrocities against civilians. They claimed responsibility for killing members of a civilian medical team in the remote, northeastern province of Badakhshan, which has, until recently, been a relatively peaceful area.

At about the same time, in the northwestern province of Badghis, the Taliban killed a 47-year-old pregnant widow accused of adultery. She was flogged 200 times and then shot in the head. The man responsible for impregnating her was apparently not punished. ... (much more in article)

Regards

Mike

AdamG
03-05-2011, 05:07 AM
took a right turn ... to Helsinki. :)

Colonel (Eversti) Sellin would not get along well with the detained folks at Gitmo (from the "Battle-of-Barg-e-Matal" piece):



Obviously not (having first-hand experience with them there detainees), but it was a play on The Village fate of folks who retire with a bout of tea-cup shattering.

Bob's World
03-05-2011, 04:12 PM
Thus proving the old adage of "the truth hurts." It hurt the feelings of the recipients, so they retaliated against the speaker of it. Truth is an absolute defense in a slander case, and there is no slander here.

This paragraph reminded me of a 6 month sentence I served on the Army CAT preparing twice a day briefs for the Army senior leadership:

"The commander’s immediate subordinates, usually one- and two-star generals, listen to the CUA in a semi-comatose state. Each briefer has about one or two minutes to impart either information or misinformation. Usually they don’t do either. Fortunately, none of the information provided makes an indelible impact on any of the generals."
I never ceased to be amazed at how when a slide carrying some incredibly important issue would be interrupted by some star-wearing G-staffer to comment. Rarely was the comment one of substance, but most often one demonstrating amazing skills at ignoring all substantive data to focus on looking for errors in basic math or font pitch.

"Excuse me, but on slide 24 it showed a total of 67,345 troops in theater, yet on slide 32 it shows 67,348. Which one is it??"

or

"The font of the 3rd bullet down appears to be 2 points smaller than the other bullets."

Such comments were always followed my mummers of approval and congratulation by their peers sitting high above the action officers in their alcoved balcony; and general head-shaking and exchanged glances of "WTF?" between the action officers below.

Yet build a slide that points out that the decision to concentrate all CASEVAC at Bagram and Kandahar was leaving a vast territory where SOF forces were operating far outside the Golden hour and it is pulled from the brief during rehearsal. "This would embarrass both the aviation and medical generals." By all means, besides, I should have been focusing on checking the math and font pitch on my regular slides...

I know Larry and he is a very sharp officer who cares deeply about the mission. He is a bit quirky and doesn't play the game very well though. He probably overlooks critical issues like minor math and font errors as well.

AdamG
03-07-2011, 10:00 PM
Mr Meek tries to make sense of the Army's dichotomy, while Yossarian continues to fly more missions.


Ironically, reporters asking about Sellin's sudden status as military folk hero -- for blowing the whistle on what he agrees is fast resembling a permanent war -- have been told by a NATO flack that the colonel didn't have enough "situational awareness" in Kabul's IJC nerve center to [**critique the war**](http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/09/army-colonel-fired-for-powerpoint-...). But as I noted in yesterday story about Sellin's dismissal, he had enough of "situational awareness" to be tasked with briefing a reporter from one of America's largest daily newspapers.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2010/09/from-phd-green-beret-to-war-wh.html


"I had added no value to the war effort," the Special Forces officer and native of Saddle Brook, N.J., lamented after getting booted out of Afghanistan.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-09-26/news/27076370_1_afghanistan-war-effort-longest-war

Welcome to the Greek chorus, Colonel. Sign for your helmet, spear and shield behind the stage. Stand next to Hans and take your cues when the fat lady starts singing.

AdamG
03-25-2011, 02:23 AM
Now, though, you can create basic PowerPoint presentations on iPhones, Androids and BlackBerrys, as long as you have Documents To Go Premium ($17 on Apple and $15 on BlackBerry; on Android the “Full Version” is $15). Building PowerPoint documents from start to finish had been the last frontier for mobile users of Microsoft Office files, who previously could create and edit only Word documents and Excel spreadsheets on the iPhone.

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/technology/personaltech/24smart.html?ref=technology

Rogue16
07-22-2011, 11:36 PM
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/06/microsoft-helps-the-army-avoid-death-by-powerpoint/ - Check out one former soldier who is trying to help make PPT better.

Jedburgh
07-26-2011, 09:26 PM
Danger Room, 22 Jul 11: Army Command Conducts Entire Briefing – In Comic Sans (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/07/army-briefing-comic-sans/)

You’ve got to nail that briefing for your boss. What better way to get that presentation to pop than to make your points in comic sans, the merry court jester of type faces? If this sounds like a good idea, there’s a senior-level Army position waiting for you.

Somehow, an aide to Gen. Ann Dunwoody, leader of the Army’s Materiel Command, prepared a staggering 100-slide PowerPoint (http://www.scribd.com/doc/60579101/Final-Slides-SecArmy-Visit) entirely in comic sans....

bourbon
09-02-2011, 03:51 PM
The Information Sage: Meet Edward Tufte, the graphics guru to the power elite who is revolutionizing how we see data (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/mayjune_2011/features/the_information_sage029137.php), by Joshua Yaffa. The Washington Monthly, May/June 2011.

Edward Tufte occupies a revered and solitary place in the world of graphic design. Over the last three decades, he has become a kind of oracle in the growing field of data visualization—the practice of taking the sprawling, messy universe of information that makes up the quantitative backbone of everyday life and turning it into an understandable story. His four books on the subject have sold almost two million copies, and in his crusade against euphemism and gloss, he casts a shadow over the world of graphs and charts similar to the specter of George Orwell over essay and argument.

Tufte is a philosopher king who reigns over his field largely because he invented it. For years, graphic designers were regarded as decorators, whose primary job was to dress up facts with pretty pictures. Tufte introduced a reverence for math and science to the discipline and, in turn, codified the rules that would create a new one, which has come to be called, alternatively, information design or analytical design. His is often the authoritative word on what makes a good chart or graph, and over the years his influence has changed the way places like the Wall Street Journal and NASA display data.

kazuko.parsons
09-19-2011, 10:11 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/technology/personaltech/24smart.html?ref=technology

Nice article, i enjoyed reading it