A consulting deck is an argument, not decoration: lead with the answer, prove it beside the claim, close with the decision. This deck is built that way — and shows you how.
Answer first, then the evidence, the options, and the decision.
"Q3 revenue"
Tells the reader nothing. They have to dig for the point.
"Revenue grew 18%, carried by enterprise"
Read the titles alone, top to bottom — the whole story is there.
Building in-house takes nine months and carries the most risk for the least control gained.
A platform ships in three months and covers 80% of the requirement out of the box.
A delivery partner closes the gap with no permanent headcount commitment.
New logos, larger deals, less churn.
Pricing, packaging, discount discipline.
Cost to serve, automation, vendors.
A claim earns belief when the proof sits next to it, not three slides later.
Source: illustrative.
Same chart, same axis — so the eye compares shape, not scale.
Source: illustrative.
Different chart types, one message each — the title states the combined so-what.
Source: illustrative.
The obvious wins — start here.
Worth it, but resource it properly.
Fill-ins, only if idle capacity.
Politely decline.
| Option | Cost | Time | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Build in-house | High | 9 mo | High |
| Buy a platform | Medium | 3 mo | Low |
| Partner | Low | 6 mo | Medium |
Source: illustrative estimates.
Source: illustrative.
More buyers, larger contracts.
Automation cut the cost to serve.
A tier the market accepted.
Three drivers, no overlap — that is what MECE means.
Fix churn in the two at-risk accounts before anything else.
Launch the mid-market tier the pilot validated.
Roll the onboarding automation to every region.
Two hires in customer engineering by Q3.
Four cards, one glance — use a 2×2 of cards when the moves are parallel, a flow when they are sequential.
A chart is not an argument. Say the so-what out loud — what should the reader now believe, and do, because of this number?
Pick two use-cases, ship one pilot, set the guardrails.
Roll the winner to a full team; retire the manual path.
Standardise tooling, train the org, make it the default.
Move fast on the pilot, slow on the platform — reversible steps first, lock-in last.
○ none · ◕ partial · ● strong
Source: team assessment, illustrative.
Source: margin bridge, FY23 → FY24 (illustrative).
Source: programme office, illustrative.
Finds us via search and peers; pricing is opaque at first touch.
First demo booked in under a week.
Runs a pilot; security review stalls for three weeks.
Pilot data imports without IT help.
Procurement restarts the conversation; champion fatigue sets in.
One-page order form, e-signed.
Setup is fast but training lags; usage dips in week two.
First team hits value in 14 days.
Renewal is smooth; expansion waits on a business case.
Second team self-serves a workspace.
Source: 24 buyer interviews, Q2 — illustrative.
Source: FY24 management accounts, illustrative.
One page: who we serve, what we must own, and where the money comes from.
Two steps — the first invite and week two — cost more than the other five together.
Everything a person opens, and nothing that stores.
One gateway: auth, rate limits, and every audit record.
Nine services, each owning its own store.
One warehouse every tier reads from, and nothing writes around.
Three of these edges fail loudly. The replication into the warehouse fails quietly.
38 sources, change data capture
The only place all four agree
412 metric definitions
What the business acts on
Every turn should add users. Activation is where the turn loses them.
Every new team adds sources
Volume sharpens the defaults
Fewer steps to a finished deck
Everything below the migration waits on the migration.
Old ledger retired
EU write path live
Needs the new ledger
No sales call under €5k
One queue, one owner
Two regions to answer for
Unblocks the February parallel run; the capacity is already contracted.
Decide by 14 Feb · sponsor: CFO
Holds the quoted price to quarter end and releases the integration team.
Decide by 28 Feb · sponsor: COO
Protects the cutover date; without them training slips two weeks.
Decide by 7 Mar · sponsor: HR
| Risk | Impact if it lands | Mitigation | Owner | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data migration slips | Parallel run misses February | Second extraction window booked; dry run 12 Feb | R. Okafor | High |
| Vendor withdraws | €180k re-tender and six weeks | Contract signed by 28 Feb; runner-up held warm | M. Lindqvist | Medium |
| Training capacity | Cutover lands on an untrained desk | Two trainers requested today; content is ready | S. Haddad | Medium |
| Legacy reconciliation | Re-work discovered late in UAT | Profiling complete; cleanup sprint in January | Data lead | Low |
Source: programme risk log, 31 January
Buy the platform; partner on delivery.
Shortlist three vendors by month-end.