Exercises — Chapter 31: Delivering Technical Presentations

These exercises are about delivery, so several ask you to produce or revise spoken material — scripts, hooks, answers — and a few ask you to rehearse out loud and record yourself. Writing for the ear is still writing; the bloat is just different (fillers instead of nominalizations). Where a task is open-ended, a self-assessment rubric follows in place of an answer.

Part A — Analyze This ⭐

Identify what works and what's broken. Name the principle.

A1. A speaker opens a 20-minute conference talk like this: "Hi everyone, thanks so much for being here, I really appreciate it. My name's Priya, I'm a data engineer at Northwind, and today I'm going to walk you through our data pipeline and talk a bit about some of the challenges we faced and how we solved them. So let me start with some background on the company…" Diagnose the opening. What's the cost of these first 30 seconds, and what should replace them?

A2. A presenter ends every talk on a slide that reads only "Questions?" and leaves it up for the full 10-minute Q&A. Name two things wrong with this and the single fix that addresses both.

A3. Here is a speaker's plan for a 25-minute slot: "I read through the slides in my head last night and it took about 25 minutes, so I'm good on time." Identify the two flawed assumptions and predict what will actually happen in the room.

A4. A speaker, asked a question they can't answer, replies confidently: "Yeah, that should scale fine, we've basically architected it to handle that, no problem." — but they have not tested it and don't actually know. The questioner is a domain expert. What's the risk, and what would an honest answer have looked like?

A5. Read this transcript of 15 seconds of a nervous talk: "So, um, what we, like, basically did here was, you know, we sort of took the, uh, the existing system and, like, kind of refactored it, and that, um, made it faster, basically." Count the filler words. Rewrite the content in two clean spoken sentences. What single delivery technique would have eliminated most of the fillers in real time?

A6. A speaker giving a virtual webinar shares their entire desktop so the audience can "see everything," looks down at the participant grid the whole time, and speaks in a flat, even monotone into a silent room of cameras-off attendees. Identify three distinct virtual-presentation mistakes and the fix for each.

A7. A presenter's live demo fails (the service won't start on the conference Wi-Fi). They re-type the command four times, mutter "sorry, this normally works, let me just… one sec… sorry," fiddle for ninety seconds, then give up and say "well, you'll have to take my word for it." Diagnose the failure of preparation and the failure of recovery separately.

A8. A speaker memorized their entire 15-minute talk word for word. Four minutes in, a phone rings, they lose their place, freeze for an excruciating six seconds, then restart the sentence and never quite recover their rhythm. What delivery choice made this failure mode possible, and what would have prevented it?

Part B — Revise This ⭐⭐

Rewrite the weak material. Give the scenario, not the answer.

B1. Revise this throat-clearing opening into a hook. Scenario: a 30-minute talk to other engineers about a caching layer your team built that cut latency dramatically. Weak opening: "Hello, I'm going to talk today about caching. Caching is a technique used to store frequently accessed data so it can be retrieved faster. In this talk I'll cover what caching is, why it matters, our implementation, and our results." Write a hook (a problem, a number, a scene, or a question) plus a one-sentence roadmap to follow it.

B2. Rewrite this defensive, bait-taking Q&A response. Scenario: after a talk on your benchmark results, a questioner asks with an edge, "Aren't these benchmarks kind of cherry-picked?" Weak response: "No, they're not cherry-picked at all, that's not how we work, and I think that's a pretty unfair characterization of a lot of careful effort." Rewrite it to separate substance from tone, extract the legitimate core, and answer on the merits.

B3. Revise this closing. Scenario: a talk arguing that writing documentation drove the adoption of an open-source project. Weak close: "And, uh, yeah, that's basically it. I think that covers everything I wanted to say. Are there any questions?" Write a one-sentence takeaway close (the thing you want the room to repeat) that echoes a strong hook, followed by the invitation to questions.

B4. Rewrite this self-defeating pre-talk self-talk into a reappraisal-plus-routine version. Weak self-talk: "Oh no, my heart's pounding, I need to calm down, everyone's going to see how nervous I am, why did I agree to do this, just don't mess up." Produce the internal script a prepared speaker would run instead.

B5. Revise this bluffed non-answer into an honest bridge. Scenario: after a talk on a new service, you're asked, "What's the failover behavior if the primary database goes down mid-transaction?" — and you genuinely don't know the exact behavior. Weak answer: "It should just fail over automatically, that's all handled." Write a bridge (state the limit → connect to what you do know → offer a next step).

B6. Rewrite this demo-failure recovery. Scenario: your live demo of a CLI tool hangs because the venue network is blocking an API call; you have a backup recording. Weak recovery (panicked): "Oh no, um, this is weird, it worked this morning, let me just try again… hmm, sorry everyone, the wifi here is terrible, give me a second…" Write the calm, rehearsed recovery line and the transition to the recording.

B7. A speaker has 6 main points planned for a 20-minute talk and keeps running over in rehearsal. Revise their structure (not their delivery): apply the "three to five points" guidance from 31.1 to decide what to cut or merge, and explain your reasoning in two sentences. (Invent plausible point titles for a talk on, say, migrating a monolith to microservices.)

B8. Revise this virtual-talk plan. Scenario: a 60-minute remote conference talk. Weak plan: "I'll present my slides for 55 minutes and leave 5 for questions, share my whole screen, and just go straight through since I can't see anyone anyway." Rewrite the plan to fix length, screen sharing, and engagement, with at least two specific interaction moments.

Part C — Write This ⭐⭐–⭐⭐⭐

Produce the spoken material from the scenario.

C1. Script your hook and roadmap. Pick a real talk you might give (a project you've worked on, a paper, a tool, a concept you know well) or use this scenario: a 20-minute talk to a mixed technical audience about a bug that took your team down for six hours and the design change that prevents it. Write, verbatim, the first 30–60 seconds (a hook that opens a loop — problem, number, scene, or question — and explicitly does not start with "Hi, I'm…") immediately followed by a one-sentence roadmap of the talk's shape. Keep it spoken-register: short sentences, words you'd actually say aloud.

C2. Write a keyword outline for one talk. Take the talk from C1 (or another) and write its full keyword outline on what would fit a single index card: one cue line per main point (3–5 points), plus the exact verbatim wording of just three load-bearing sentences — your hook's first line, your single most important transition, and your closing takeaway. Mark which lines are cues (improvise from these) and which three are scripted (say these exactly).

C3. Rehearse answers to three hostile questions. For your C1 talk, list the three questions you would least like to be asked — aim at the genuine soft spots (a limitation you'd gloss over, an obvious objection, a comparison to a rival approach). For each, write out a delivered answer that (a) restates/reframes the question, (b) extracts and concedes the legitimate core, and (c) answers the substance calmly — using a bridge if you don't fully know the answer. These are scripts you'd rehearse out loud, so write them in spoken register.

C4. Script a demo backup plan. Imagine a talk with a live software demo (CLI, web app, notebook — your choice). Write: (a) the one-line recovery sentence you'll say if the live demo fails, (b) a 3–5 step backup checklist (record a screen capture; don't depend on venue Wi-Fi; test on the real equipment; screenshots as second fallback; pre-stage state), and (c) one sentence on the specific failure mode you think is most likely for your demo and how your backup covers it.

C5. Write the speaker notes for three slides. Take any three consecutive assertion–evidence slides (real ones from your Chapter 30 deck, or invented). For each slide, write speaker notes as a keyword outline (not full prose), plus a one-line spoken transition to the next slide. The notes should let you talk fluently from the slide headline without reading anything.

C6. Plan and script a virtual opening. For a 35-minute virtual talk of your choosing, write: (a) your hook (verbatim), (b) one chat-engagement prompt to deploy in the first two minutes ("drop a 👍 if…"), and (c) a one-line note on your audio/camera/screen-share setup decisions (what mic, where you'll look, what window you'll share).

Part D — Synthesis & Critical Thinking ⭐⭐⭐

D1. Find the flaw. A colleague argues: "Delivery doesn't really matter for a technical audience — they care about the substance, not the showmanship. If the content is good, the talk is good." Using this chapter and Chapter 18, write a two-paragraph rebuttal. (Hint: the audience is live and processes in real time; consider what happens to good content delivered as a monotone reading of dense slides.)

D2. Translate the principle across modes. The chapter's core delivery move — "cut content, don't talk faster" when you're behind — is about protecting comprehension under time pressure. Write one paragraph explaining the written analogue of this principle from earlier in the book (think Chapter 3 on clarity/concision and Chapter 4 on structure): when a document is "too long for the reader's time," what is the equivalent of "cut content, don't talk faster," and what would "talking faster" correspond to in prose?

D3. The integrity parallel. Chapter 18 and this chapter both insist: when you don't know, say so and bridge — don't bluff. Chapter 29 (Writing with AI) has a rule that rhymes with this. In one paragraph, connect the Q&A "don't bluff" principle to the broader theme that runs through the book about honesty and not overclaiming (Themes 1 and the ethics thread). Why is a confident bluff in Q&A a clarity failure as much as an integrity failure?

D4. Design a delivery for three audiences. You've built one talk about a data-analysis finding (tie this to Dana Whitfield's churn work, Chapters 2 and 27). Sketch how the delivery — not just the slides — would differ for (a) a room of fellow data scientists at an internal tech talk, (b) a virtual board update for executives, and (c) a recorded conference talk for a general technical audience. Address hook, pacing, what you'd cut, and Q&A expectations for each. (This is Theme 2 — audience is everything — applied to delivery.)

D5. Rehearsal as revision. Write a short reflection (one or two paragraphs) connecting this chapter's insistence on rehearsing out loud to Chapter 5's framing of writing as plan → draft → revise. What is the talk's "first draft," what does "revision" look like for a talk, and why do people resist out-loud rehearsal for the same reason they resist revising writing?

Part M — Mixed Practice (Interleaved) ⭐⭐–⭐⭐⭐

Each problem mixes this chapter with an earlier one. Decide which approach the situation calls for before you act.

M1. You're handed a slide whose headline reads "Q3 Infrastructure Metrics" over a table of twelve numbers in 9-point font. You have to present it tomorrow. Decide: is this primarily a Chapter 30 (slide design) problem, a Chapter 9 (visuals/captions) problem, or a Chapter 31 (delivery) problem — or all three? Then (a) rewrite the headline as an assertion, (b) describe what the body visual should become, and (c) say how you'll deliver it (what you say, where you look, what you do with the dense table).

M2. You wrote a clear, well-structured 1,200-word data memo for your VP (Chapter 27 / Chapter 20 territory). Now you've been asked to present the same findings in a 10-minute slot to the leadership team. What carries over from the written version and what must change for delivery? Produce the spoken hook and the one-sentence takeaway you'd lead and close with.

M3. A teammate's email asking you to review their talk says only: "can you look at my slides and tell me if they're good." Drawing on Chapter 19 (emails) and this chapter, write the reply that (a) asks the two or three questions you'd need to actually help (Chapter 2 — who's the audience? Chapter 31 — have they rehearsed out loud? is there a demo?), and (b) sets a useful frame for the kind of feedback you can give.

M4. You're co-presenting a 40-minute talk with a colleague who tends to read dense slides verbatim and run long. Using this chapter (delivery, timing, the read-the-slides mistake) and Chapter 23 (collaborative writing / dividing work and harmonizing voice), draft the two-paragraph note you'd send them before your joint rehearsal — addressing the slide-reading habit and the timing risk constructively (Chapter 34's "critique the work, not the person" spirit applies).

M5. Your live demo depends on a third-party API. Two days before the talk, you learn that API has had intermittent outages this week. Combining 31.7 (demo backups) with the risk-thinking from Chapter 22 (instructions / anticipating failure) and Chapter 21 (incident reasoning), list the layered precautions you'd put in place, in priority order, and state which single one you'd never skip.

M6. You're giving a virtual talk to a global audience. Combining 31.8 (virtual presence) with Chapter 10's accessibility disciplines, list four decisions that serve both virtual delivery and accessibility at once (e.g., something that helps both a low-bandwidth viewer and a screen-reader user).

Part E — Extension ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (optional)

E1. Record, transcribe, diagnose. Record yourself giving a 5-minute version of a real talk. Transcribe the first two minutes (auto-transcription is fine). Then mark it up like the editor this book trains you to be: circle every filler word, bracket every sentence that runs too long for the ear, flag every place a deliberate pause would have helped, and note any sentence you can tell was read rather than spoken. Write a one-paragraph "delivery diagnosis" of yourself and three specific fixes for the next run. (This is the delivery analogue of the self-editing pass from Chapter 12.)

E2. The reappraisal field test. Before your next two low-stakes speaking moments (a meeting update, a class question, a stand-up), deliberately run the reappraisal script — "I'm excited," not "calm down" — plus the breathe-and-plant routine. Afterward, write a short honest note: did relabeling the arousal change anything? Be skeptical and specific; this is a Tier 2 technique, and your own data is worth gathering. Note also which mattered more for you — the reappraisal or the preparation.

E3. Steal a delivery. Watch a technical talk you find genuinely compelling (a conference recording, a keynote). Analyze its delivery (not its content): How does it open — is there a hook, and what shape? How does the speaker handle transitions, pace, and pauses? Are slides cues or documents? How is Q&A (if shown) handled? Write a one-page breakdown of three specific delivery techniques you could borrow, in the spirit of Chapter 39's "read [and watch] as a writer."

Selected solutions and rubrics: appendices/answers-to-selected.md. For the open-ended tasks (most of Parts C, D, E), use the self-assessment rubric below.

Self-Assessment Rubric (for produced spoken material)

Score each dimension 1–4 (1 = not yet, 4 = strong):

• Hook earns attention: Opens a loop (problem/number/scene/question) in under a minute; does not lead with housekeeping. — / 4
• Structure is audible: A one-sentence roadmap; clear spoken transitions between a small number of points (3–5); a takeaway close, not "Questions?". — / 4
• Spoken register: Sentences sound like speech, not read prose; short, natural, sayable aloud. — / 4
• Timing discipline: Rehearsed out loud against a clock; lands at ~90% of slot; cut points identified. — / 4
• Presence (if rehearsed/recorded): Filler words replaced with pauses; pace deliberate; eyes on audience/lens, not screen/notes. — / 4
• Q&A craft: Restates the question; answers briefly; bridges honestly when unsure; addresses the substance (not tone) of hostile questions. — / 4
• Risk handled: Demo backup planned with a calm recovery line; (virtual) audio-first, lens, engagement, right-window share. — / 4

16+ / 28 = ready to deliver. Below 16 = revise the lowest dimension first, then rehearse out loud again — like writing, the talk gets good in the second pass.