PowerPoint Perils and Pointers

Jury Impact is occasionally asked to speak at events and conferences to discuss our experiences, emerging trends and tips for effective trial and mediation strategy.  We pride ourselves on our concise, informative – and, most of all, interesting – presentations.

However, anyone who has ever attended a trial lasting multiple weeks, a large industry conference or even a weekly staff meeting knows not all presentations are created equal.  If you have ever instinctually cringed at the very words “PowerPoint” – suspecting a longwinded, text-heavy, monotonous slide show was coming up – then you understand the hesitancy some trial teams have when it comes to using presentation software and digital projectors.

So is it best to just avoid using PowerPoint to avoid the general loathing of “slide shows?”  Not at all.  In fact, we’ve learned jurors actually expect this technology in the courtroom, and we believe it’s an essential component of storytelling.

In a previous “Things…” article we mentioned a trial where plaintiff’s counsel, in an attempt to seem more “down home” and make the defense team seem like city slickers with fancy, big-budget tech gear, relied on archaic overhead transparencies and a disorganized pile of poster boards to present their theory.  During exit interviews, jurors (most of whom owned “fancy” touchscreen smartphones) were shocked by the lack of technology, and said the defense team’s use of programs such as TrialMax and the ability to find, display and enlarge records, by contrast, seemed “forthcoming” and demonstrated they had “nothing to hide.”

When the bulk of the U.S. population has Internet access and many access it through smartphones, we have found there is no advantage to scaling back your use of technology to avoid seeming “intimidating.”

In fact, research has shown that not only do jurors appreciate when PowerPoint and other presentation programs are utilized, their verdicts favor the use of technology as well.  This study revealed that when the plaintiff used PowerPoint and the defense did not, jurors tended to favor the plaintiff, and when the defense used it but the plaintiff did not, the jury favored the defense.  However, when both sides used a PowerPoint presentation, the playing field evened out and this was not a primary factor in decision-making.  

So, what’s the solution?  We’ve found the key is treating programs such as PowerPoint and TrialMax as the side dish to your main course – you want your arguments and evidence to still be the primary focal point, and allow the slide presentation to enhance, and reinforce, what the jury sees and hears.

• After monitoring many trials, we’ve had the chance to see what works and what doesn’t.  Some tips: Keep the text on each slide as short as possible (one-line bullet points, for example).
• Consider quality over quantity.  After sitting (and slouching, and dozing) through multiple 80-plus-slide presentations during opening statements, we have found 30 to 35 slides is the maximum to maintain juror interest.
• Use clear fonts without frilly edges (something like Arial or Helvetica is easy to see at a distance).
• Make sure at least two or three other people edit your slides – even a couple of typos can be distracting and erode your credibility.
• Skip the “funny” clip art and animations, and save them for snarky office kitchen notes.

If you would like assistance in creating a captivating, succinct trial presentation or would like to test the effectiveness of audiovisuals on a sample jury prior to trial, please email Senior Vice President Claire Luna at cluna@juryimpact.net or call 714.754.1010.