Top banner ad available.

The topic of economic gender imbalance is highly important, but very complex and even potentially boring to convey. So how then to best communicate the meaning behind all the numbers and statistics that are deeply buried in a 150-page report titled the "Women's Economic Opportunity Index" (PDF), developed by The Economist Intelligence Unit?

A traditional PowerPoint presentation?

Or one on visualization steroids? That is: an infographically-augmented presentation?

The following 6-minute infographic presentation, watchable below, was given at the prestigious World In 2011 Festival, an event that coincided with the 25th Anniversary of The Economist's "The World In..." print publication. The presentation tells the story of where women stand in the context of business, regarding issues such as maternity leave or property rights.

What do you think? Should all statistics-rich presentations be given in this way?

Disclaimer: JESS3 is an sponsor.


VERY nice and informative presentation -- succinct, graphically pleasing, to the point. Definitely an excellent example of how statistics should be delivered!

Thu 17 Feb 2011 at 1:37 AM
Sara Newton

The presentation was very well done and easy to understand. It's clear that the speaker needs to be more in control of moving between sets of information, though, as at points he was clearly rushing to catch up and the information didn't always stay on the screen as long as needed to listen and then process the information visually. So in that way the traditional PowerPoint-type speaker-controlled advancement is important. But visually, it was excellent.

Thu 17 Feb 2011 at 7:06 AM

It was an informative presentation. I totally dug the esthetics -- the design was beautiful -- but I kept coming up against three things:

1. He just whipped through it -- no visualization was up long enough to grok it. I know, I know: I have a pause button. But in terms of presentation, that was pretty tough.

2. The repetitive, geometric nature of the graphics actually made it harder to understand ("Wait... what do the triangles mean now?").

3. Scales were uniformly missing. Not just visually, but it really stood out in the comment about domestic violence causing women to work "11 fewer days" -- 11 fewer days per month, per year, per lifetime?

One of the closing graphics, that represented the cost to various economies of violence against women was clearly using the cost in billions of dollars as the radius of the starburst... but presenting the information in a way that caused us to compare the areas, which really twisted perception.

It's artfully designed. But hard to read and hard to understand, particularly at speed.

Thu 17 Feb 2011 at 3:05 PM
Commenting has been temporarily disabled.