<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;Every Meeting I Have Ever Attended..&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2008/01/a-response-to-e/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2008/01/a-response-to-e/</link>
	<description>Running commentary about agile development, user experience design and Ajax.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 18:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2008/01/a-response-to-e/#comment-144</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:42:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pathf.com/blogs/?p=117#comment-144</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Somewhat along the same lines, I once attended a Tufte seminar where he compared the rate of verbal communication to the rate of written communication. I forget the exact numbers, but I wouldn't be far off if I said that people comprehend written text two - three times faster than if that same text is read aloud to them.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;He suggested that one way to make meetings more efficient would be to ditch powerpoint and have the main presenter to write a comprehensive memo. At the start of the meeting, distribute it and say "OK, everyone take 10 minutes to read this thing. Once we're all done, we'll talk it over." And you just saved 20-30 minutes of every attendee's day.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Of course, that would represent much more work on the part of the presenter -- writing clearly is pretty time consuming for most. Which gives you a clue as to the real source of Powerpoint's popularity. It makes communication easier for the presenter, not more efficient for the listener.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Somewhat along the same lines, I once attended a Tufte seminar where he compared the rate of verbal communication to the rate of written communication. I forget the exact numbers, but I wouldn&#8217;t be far off if I said that people comprehend written text two - three times faster than if that same text is read aloud to them.</p>
<p>He suggested that one way to make meetings more efficient would be to ditch powerpoint and have the main presenter to write a comprehensive memo. At the start of the meeting, distribute it and say &#8220;OK, everyone take 10 minutes to read this thing. Once we&#8217;re all done, we&#8217;ll talk it over.&#8221; And you just saved 20-30 minutes of every attendee&#8217;s day.</p>
<p>Of course, that would represent much more work on the part of the presenter &#8212; writing clearly is pretty time consuming for most. Which gives you a clue as to the real source of Powerpoint&#8217;s popularity. It makes communication easier for the presenter, not more efficient for the listener.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
