The Biggest Presentation Mistake Smart People Make
By John Millen
I work with some of the smartest people in the world: data scientists, financial analysts, technologists and other experts who live and breathe complex ideas.
They’re brilliant. In many cases, they’re changing the world.
But when it comes to presenting their ideas—especially to non-technical audiences or executives—many of them struggle.
Not because they’re unprepared. Not because they lack the right data. In fact, that’s the problem.
They over-prepare. They share too much data. And they often lose their audiences before they even get to the point.
If you’ve ever watched eyes glaze over during your presentation—or been asked, “So what’s your recommendation?” five minutes after you explained it—this might be why.
Here’s the good news: there’s a fix. It’s not about changing your content. It’s about changing your approach.
Let me explain.
Smart people default to deductive thinking
When experts communicate, they often use what's called deductive reasoning.
That means they build their argument step by step:
- Here's the background.
- Here's the data.
- Here's the analysis.
- And…finally…here’s the conclusion.
That’s a great, logical progression for solving technical problems and it works in academic papers and technical deep-dives.
But it’s a terrible approach for most presentations—especially when you’re speaking to busy decision-makers.
Why? Because your audience isn’t always tracking you. They’re not in your head.
And if you wait until the end to tell them your key message, there’s a good chance you’ve lost them along the way.
Flip It: Start with the bottom line
Instead, I advise my clients to do the opposite. Great communicators use inductive reasoning.
That means you start with the conclusion and then back it up with a few key points.
It’s like reading an article online. If it’s written right, you’ll see a headline and first paragraph that reflects the most important idea.
If people stop reading after the first sentence, they’ve still got the core message.
That’s exactly how your presentations should work.
Instead of:
“We analyzed 17 models, then ran a regression across three scenarios...”
Say:
“We recommend investing $5M in Segment A. Here’s why.”
When you lead with your recommendation, everyone knows where you’re going.
The details that follow have a purpose—they’re not just information dumps, they’re supporting evidence.
Executives think inductively
If you’re presenting to senior leaders or other decision makers, understand this: they don’t have time for a slow build.
They’re as distracted as everyone else today.
And they’re also making rapid decisions, often with incomplete information. They’re scanning for what matters, and they need the bottom line fast.
That’s why high-level consultants (think McKinsey, BCG, Bain) are trained to use a top-down communication style:
- Start with the conclusion.
- Back it up with 2–3 key arguments.
- Offer details only as needed.
This approach is sometimes called the Pyramid Principle, and it’s a game-changer for technical professionals who want to communicate with impact.
You’re not dumbing anything down—you’re leading with clarity. You still have the data. You just deploy it strategically, not all at once.
Data builds credibility. Clarity builds influence.
Experts love data because it builds credibility. But clarity is what builds influence.
You might win technical points by walking through every variable, but you’ll lose the room if no one knows what you’re saying—or why it matters.
If you want to be heard, start with what your audience cares about most:
- What’s the problem?
- What’s your recommendation?
- Why should they care?
Once they’re nodding along, then show them how you got there.
When I’m doing presentation coaching, I ask my smart clients, “what will they do if they have questions?”
“Ask?”
Yes, and by not providing every detail, you’re giving your listeners the power to engage and show you what’s really important to them.
A simple shift, a big payoff
Here’s a quick before-and-after to illustrate the difference:
Deductive approach:
“We looked at Q2 metrics and segmented customer behavior by region. After filtering the outliers and applying predictive modeling, we found one segment with higher profitability. Based on this, we recommend focusing our next campaign on Segment A.”
Inductive Approach:
“We recommend focusing our next campaign on Segment A. It’s 28% more profitable than other groups, and here’s what the data shows…”
Same content. Very different impact.
The Bottom Line
If you’re an expert who wants to make a bigger impact, don’t just focus on having the right answer. Focus on delivering it in the right way.
Use inductive thinking. Start with your bottom line. Give your audience the point, not the process.
You’ll be clearer. More persuasive. And far more likely to drive action.
