Benchmarks / DeckBench / Wrenfield Borough Council

Measured by Spring Prompt

Mercury 3: Library services: choosing how to save £350,000

For the council's cabinet (elected members), meeting in public. The decision it supports: which of three options to adopt to save £350,000 a year from libraries.

Verdict
Not presentable
Deck rating
812
Slides
6 (brief: 5-8)
Design quality
67%

Why it is not presentable

  • Did not give the analysis's recommendation within the first two slides
  1. Slide 1 of Mercury 3's deck
    Slide 1Download slide imagePolished
  2. Slide 2 of Mercury 3's deck
    Slide 2Download slide imagePolished Title is a topic label rather than a takeaway
  3. Slide 3 of Mercury 3's deck
    Slide 3Download slide imageAcceptable The title names the topic rather than stating the main consultation finding.Title 'What the consultation found' is a topic label; it could state the finding (e.g. B is the only option with more support than opposition)
  4. Slide 4 of Mercury 3's deck
    Slide 4Download slide imageAcceptable The topic title does not resolve the competing messages about usage, cost and wider community value.Title is a topic label; the real point (book issues alone should not judge which libraries matter) is buried in the last bullet
  5. Slide 5 of Mercury 3's deck
    Slide 5Download slide imageAcceptable The main conclusion about Option B is presented as a small grey sentence near the bottom rather than as the headline.The key takeaway sits in small grey text at the bottom, detached from the table and the weakest element on the slide
  6. Slide 6 of Mercury 3's deck
    Slide 6Download slide imageAcceptable The large, bright review callout gives a secondary action disproportionate visual emphasis compared with the recommendation.The bold, boxed review note is the most prominent element and competes with the actual recommendation