Are You Still Making
Presentations in PowerPoint?

Why do we keep explaining the same things,
even after sending the document?

I used to make most of my proposals and direction documents in PowerPoint. Materials that looked right on my MacBook would look different in another environment, or a video I had prepared would stop in the middle of a meeting. Beyond getting the content right, I constantly had to think about whether the document would open properly on the other person's screen and be read all the way through.

Fonts and Layout

When a file I had made on my MacBook was opened on another computer, the fonts would sometimes break or be replaced with different typefaces, changing the line breaks and layout I had carefully set.

Image Quality

Images that had looked crisp would sometimes appear blurry or pixelated after being shared or shown on another screen, making it difficult to convey the details I intended.

Videos and File Size

As I added more videos and reference materials, the files grew heavier. Waiting for a document to open, or having a video stop halfway through, interrupted the flow of my explanation.

Ever More Pages

The more I had to show, the more pages I added. It became difficult to communicate the key points at a glance, and I worried that people were less likely to read the whole document as it grew longer.

I was adding material to explain things more fully, but it was actually becoming harder to see what mattered. I needed a document that let people see the essentials first and explore only what they wanted to know more about, rather than one they had to page through from beginning to end.

Sharing and revising the materials was cumbersome, too. Export the file, reduce its size, attach it to an email. When something changed, send a new file and check again. "Which version are you looking at right now?" I had worked hard on the content, yet there was so much else to coordinate.

That was when I began thinking from the recipient's point of view. What if they could see, all in one place, what to read first, which evidence to check, and what decisions they needed to make?

How I created a proposal
and a set of working guidelines.

Recently, I took on direction for one brand and had an opportunity to propose branding work in a meeting with another company. I used HTML documents in both situations. Each opened like a web page, bringing explanations, images, and links to reference materials together in a single document.

The two documents served slightly different purposes. I designed the direction document to help its recipient understand the context and carry out the work, and the proposal to examine the company's current position and possible improvements alongside the evidence, then discuss the scope of collaboration. Below, I have excerpted only the parts I can share publicly.

CASE 01 / BRAND DIRECTION

To understand the brand's direction
and actually put it into practice

In directing a brand, my main concern was whether the recipient could fully understand the context I had in mind and translate it into their own work. Simply collecting attractive reference photos and sending them over was not enough to communicate the direction I intended.

Looking at the same photo, one person might take inspiration from the colors, another from the pose, and someone else from the background. So I wrote down why I was referencing each image, which elements needed to stay, and where there was room for change. I did not want to stop at, "Please make it feel like this."

Below is the section providing direction for creating homepage images. I made it possible to view the reference image at a large size, check what to take from it and what could be changed immediately below, then continue on to the production specifications and prompt. I documented it this way so the recipient could begin production with an understanding of why this direction made sense, without needing me beside them to explain it again.

Understand the Context

Why this scene is a reference, and what direction it is meant to convey

Check the Criteria

Which elements must stay, and which can be freely changed

Carry Out the Work

Which specifications and production guidelines to use when starting the work

Actual working document · Anonymized excerpt

I have excerpted the image production guidelines from the full brand direction document. Notice how the explanation moves from reference photos to production criteria. Screens that reveal the brand and internal materials have been excluded.

View the direction document I wrote ↗

CASE 02 / BRANDING PROPOSAL

To assess a company's current position
and propose improvements backed by evidence

The second document was created for a meeting in which I proposed branding work to a company. Before listing what I could do, I first organized what I had researched about the company, the current state of its branding, and where improvements were needed.

I then connected this to the direction I was proposing and the work I would take on within it. Wherever seeing an example would help the other person understand the proposal, I added links to the actual research materials, web pages, and YouTube videos.

I also matched the reading order to the conversation in the meeting: from "This is where things stand now," to "These are the areas I suggest improving," "This example will make it easier to understand," and "Of this work, here is what I can take on." To avoid interrupting the explanation while searching elsewhere for materials, I made it possible to open the evidence we needed right there, then return to the proposal.

Company Research

Review the research on the company alongside the current state of its branding.

Proposed Improvements

Explain what could be improved and why, along with the reasoning and direction behind the proposal.

Review Examples

Open links to research materials, web pages, and videos at the moment they are needed in the explanation.

Discuss the Scope

Distinguish between work I will handle directly, work we will do together, and work that needs a separate party.

Actual working document · Anonymized excerpt

The original also contains company research, a review of the current branding, and proposed improvements. Here, I have excluded content that reveals client information and am sharing the sections that connect the scope of work and working process with public reference links.

View the proposal I wrote ↗

I also made the research accessible
right beside the explanation.

The point was not to collect all the reference links at the end of the document. I connected each source at the point in the proposal where someone might ask, "How is this actually being done?" I placed them so readers could check the original sources, web pages, and videos immediately as they moved through the document.

FROM THE ACTUAL PROPOSAL

Go beyond explaining,
and connect readers to material they can check.

These are public materials I referenced in the actual proposal. Use the buttons to explore the document's explanations alongside the original sources.

1. 01
   Research Material · Official Press Release

   "An anniversary event involves more than a logo."

   I linked material from an actual event next to the key point of the proposal. The original source shows the sequence of the event and how it brought commemoration together with a vision for the future.

   View the original research source ↗Official press release · Opens in a new tab
2. 02
   Web Page · Brand Management Example

   "The central message and design standards need to be visible together."

   Instead of simply adding an image, I linked to the official brand page. Readers can see for themselves how the slogan and corporate identity are explained, and where the necessary files are provided.

   View the actual web page ↗Official brand page · Opens in a new tab
3. 03
   YouTube · Corporate Brand Film

   "A company's direction can also be expressed through video."

   I linked a brand film right next to the explanation of the content theme. By watching it, readers can decide which scenes and messages to reference, and what would be appropriate for us.

   Watch the video on YouTube ↗Video linked in the original document · Opens in a new tab

Read the explanation → Check the original source, web page, or video → Return to this document and make a judgment

The wording has been adapted from the original's key points to illustrate how the links work. Client information has been excluded; the external sources display the names of the brands and institutions referenced. Videos open on YouTube and do not autoplay on this page.

What mattered to me was not adding lots of links. It was explaining why I was showing each source and what the reader should look for. Connected this way, the proposal allows readers to go beyond hearing an explanation: they can examine the evidence and bring their own judgment to it.

My measure of a document shifted
from page count to purpose.

Presentation slides are good for focusing attention on one slide at a time. PDFs are useful when you need to share or print something in a fixed layout. I found HTML well suited to designing a flow in which readers could open reference materials as they read, jump to the sections they needed, and keep reading even on a small screen.

In the first document, what mattered was moving from understanding the context to carrying out the work. In the second, it was reviewing the current situation and evidence before deciding on a collaboration. Even with the same HTML format, the order of the explanation and the materials I linked changed with the purpose.

For me, the important change was less about the file extension than beginning to think about what the person using the document would do next. Could they immediately check the evidence they were curious about during a meeting? Could the person receiving the production brief understand the intention and get to work? Could someone reopen the document later and find the reason behind the proposal?

A well-made document
does more than explain.
It helps people make their next decision.

SIHA'S NOTE

When you manage a document through a link, you can revise and share it at the same address. But the latest state is not always the right one. I update documents under review and keep approved content separately, with a date and version number. Distinguishing between content that will keep changing and a finalized record became part of how I designed the document.

A different format
opens up these choices.

The table below compares presentation and distribution materials shared as files with HTML documents designed to be managed through a link. No format automatically solves every problem.

Video loading speed depends on file size and the network connection; font display depends on how fonts are included. With HTML, too, you need to check the actual environment in which the document will be used.

Is it easy for the recipient to read,
and easy to find again?

This change is not simply a matter of personal preference. Looking at the experience of reading documents on screen makes it clear why format and structure need to be considered together.

That is why I first distinguish between documents by their purpose. I publish writing I want to reach a wide audience, and set access permissions for proposals I am reviewing with specific people. Documents intended to be found through search and documents used for discussion need different approaches to sharing.

Start with your next document,
and work through these steps.

You do not need to build a large system from the outset. Choose one document for an upcoming meeting, and begin by organizing the sequence in which the other person will read and make decisions.

1. 01

   Decide what the reader needs to decide.

   Before creating a table of contents, write the document's purpose in one sentence. The information you need will depend on whether the reader needs to choose a direction, agree on the scope of work, or begin actual production.

   Example: "After reading this document, choose the image direction for the first screen."
2. 02

   Plan the order of the explanation, not the page count.

   Background → Problem → Proposal → Evidence → Execution → Points to Check. Write out this flow first, and have each section answer one question. Put lengthy supplementary explanations in expandable sections.

   Check: Does the logic of the proposal hold together when you read only the table of contents?
3. 03

   Write the criteria for judgment beside each reference.

   For an image, note what to take from it. For a table, state the conclusion to draw. For a link, explain why to open it. Connecting references where they are needed in the text is easier to understand than creating a list of attachments.

   Example: "Use the lighting and negative space in this image as references. The background and props can be changed."
4. 04

   Explain both the content and the behavior to AI.

   Provide your organized draft and request mobile reflow, table-of-contents navigation, image enlargement, reference links, and print handling. Decide at the same time whether to send a file or publish it on the web, so the way images and fonts are stored can match that choice.

   Check: Do the features you need actually work?
5. 05

   Review it on the recipient's screen.

   Check that the text is not too small on a phone, tables do not push the page sideways, and links open the right materials. If there is video, test playback. If you plan to send a file, move it to another folder and check that the images still appear.

   If the document will be used offline, also test it separately with the network disconnected.
6. 06

   Set the sharing method and rules for revisions.

   For a document shared on the web, check the URL and permissions, and record the revision date and changes whenever you update it. Keep a separate copy of the approved version. If the recipient needs a file, provide the HTML or a reviewed PDF as well.

   Suggested message: "This is the current review version. I will record any changes at the top of the document."

Please turn the draft below into a vertically scrolling HTML document.

Reader: [The person receiving the material]
Decision to make after reading: [One decision]
Delivery method: [Web address / HTML file]

1. Organize it in this order: background, problem, proposal, evidence, execution, and points to check.
2. Add a table of contents at the top that lets readers jump straight to the section they need.
3. Beside each image, indicate what to reference and what can be changed.
4. Keep long explanations collapsed, but make the key conclusions immediately visible.
5. Make sure the body text does not overflow horizontally, including on mobile.
6. If it will be delivered as a file, include the necessary images and fonts,
   and clearly distinguish content that requires an internet connection.
7. Set up the print layout so the body text is not cut off.
8. Do not invent numbers, examples, sources, or results that have not been provided.

[Insert the draft and reference materials here.]

The more often a document is reused,
the more this is worth trying.

Questions before you get started