Week 11: Storytelling with Data

Shifting Focus

• Up to now, much of the work has been about analysis
• From now on, we will spend more time on communication
• A technically correct result is not enough if nobody can quickly understand it
• The value of analysis depends on whether it informs a decision

Time: 2 minutes.

Suggested transition: “You now know enough to produce analysis. The next question is whether you can present it in a way that someone else can act on.”

Big Picture: Course Logic

%%{init: {"themeVariables": {"fontSize": "24px"}}}%%
flowchart LR
  G[Goals] ==> P[Problem]
  P ==> Q[Question]
  Q ==> Da[Data]
  Da ==> M[Model]
  M ==> R[Result]
  R ==> V[Visual Story]
  V ==> D[Decision]

  style V fill:#FFD966,stroke:#333,stroke-width:3px,color:#000

Time: 2 minutes.

Reuse the course logic students already know. The new emphasis is the step between result and decision: the visual story.

Good Visuals

Good visuals are not just about making charts.

They are about helping someone understand what matters and what to do next.

Time: 1 minute.

Why Bad Graphs Are Everywhere

• Graphs/charts are easy to create
• Good graphs are much harder to design
• Most people are not naturally trained to tell stories with numbers
• Software can generate charts quickly, but not always well
• Many graphs show data without communicating a clear message

Time: 3 minutes.

This is the basic setup from the reading introduction. Emphasize that “bad graph” does not mean fake or incorrect. It often means technically possible but communicatively weak.

Showing Data vs. Telling a Story
Adding Value

Showing data

• report the numbers
• present the default chart
• treat every detail as equally important
• leave the audience to find the point

Telling a story

• start from the decision or question
• choose a visual that fits the comparison
• reduce clutter
• focus attention
• make the takeaway visible

Time: 3 minutes.

This is a useful line to repeat: “Showing data says: here it is. Storytelling says: here is what matters.”

A technically correct chart still fails if the audience cannot quickly tell:

A. which software created it

B. what the main takeaway is

C. whether the data are quantitative

D. how long it took to build

Time: 1 minute.

B. Use this to reinforce that communication quality is part of analytical quality.

Activity: Graph Diagnosis

Graph Diagnosis: Small Groups

Discuss

• What is wrong with this graph?
• What do you think the intended message is?
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?

Be ready to report one redesign move.

Time: 1 minute to set up, 6-7 minutes for group work.

If you have six groups, assign one graph per group.

Graph 1

• What is wrong with this graph?
• What do you think the intended message is?
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?

• What is wrong with this graph?
  • too many categories for a pie chart
  • colors do not help direct attention
  • legend creates eye travel
• What do you think the intended message is?
  • The distribution of categories, but no clear takeaway about what matters
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?
  • Pie charts make it hard to compare slices, especially when there are many categories
  • The legend creates eye travel and the colors do not help direct attention

Graph 2

• What is wrong with this graph?
• What do you think the intended message is?
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?

• What is wrong with this graph?
  • too many lines shown with equal visual weight
  • legend creates eye travel
  • no single series is emphasized
  • no clear takeaway about trend or comparison
• What do you think the intended message is?
  • There is a trend in the data, but it is not clear which one or why it matters
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?
  • Line charts are good for showing trends, but the many lines make it hard to see any particular trend or comparison
  • The legend creates eye travel and the colors do not help direct attention

Graph 3

• What is wrong with this graph?
• What do you think the intended message is?
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?

• What is wrong with this graph?
  • too many labels
  • angled month names
  • grouped bars make the gap harder to track
  • no explicit statement of why the comparison matters
• What do you think the intended message is?
  • There is a gap in the backlog, but it is not clear how big it is or why it matters
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?
  • The grouped bars make it harder to see the gap than necessary
  • The labels are crowded and the angled text makes them harder to read
  • The title does not state the takeaway or decision implication

Graph 4

• What is wrong with this graph?
• What do you think the intended message is?
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?

• What is wrong with this graph?
  • too many categories for a stacked bar chart
  • colors do not help direct attention
  • legend creates eye travel
  • no clear takeaway about what matters
• What do you think the intended message is?
  • Satisfaction is highest for features A and B
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?
  • Stacked bar charts make it hard to compare categories, especially when there are many
  • The legend creates eye travel and the colors do not help direct attention

Graph 5

• What is wrong with this graph?
• What do you think the intended message is?
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?

• What is wrong with this graph?
  • too many categories for a stacked horizontal bar chart
  • colors do not help direct attention
  • no clear takeaway about what matters
• What do you think the intended message is?
  • Customers don’t look like the US populaltion
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?
  • Stacked horizontal bar charts make it hard to compare categories, especially when there are many
  • The colors do not help direct attention and the legend creates eye travel

Graph 6

• What is wrong with this graph?
• What do you think the intended message is?
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?

• What is wrong with this graph?
  • it is hard to compare the performance across businesses and over time
  • the index chart makes it hard to see the actual values and the gap between them
• What do you think the intended message is?
  • our business is improving by the end
• Why does the graph fail to communicate it?
  • clutter makes it hard to compare

Debrief: What Problems Recur?

• clutter competes with the message
• poor chart choice makes comparison difficult
• color is used without purpose
• legends create unnecessary eye travel
• context is missing: compared to what, and why does it matter?
• there is no clear takeaway

Time: 4 minutes.

This is the synthesis slide for the diagnosis activity. Write student language on the board and then map it back to these recurring problems.

The story is not automatically in the data.

The analyst has to surface it.

Time: 1 minute.

Activity:
Before vs. After

Before vs. After

• First we will walk through one example together
• Then you will do a second example in pairs before seeing the redesign
• Focus on what changed and why it improves communication

Time: 1 minute.

Full-Class Walkthrough: Before

What do you notice first?

What decision, if any, would this chart support?

Time: 3-4 minutes.

Let students struggle productively for a moment. They will probably notice that phone is highest, but many will not know whether 12.4 minutes is actually bad because the chart lacks context.

Full-Class Walkthrough: After

Decision implication:

Add staffing or redesign queue management for phone support.

Time: 3-4 minutes.

Ask:

• What changed?
• What is easier to see now?
• What decision is clearer now?

Key point: the after chart adds context, focuses attention, and states the takeaway.

What Changed?

• Context was added with a target
• The categories were ordered for the question
• One bar was highlighted
• Labels were moved onto the chart
• The title states the takeaway

Time: 2 minutes.

Map each change to the framework: - context - chart choice / ordering - clutter reduction - focus attention - story in the title

Pair Exercise

• Work with a partner
• First interpret the “before”
• Then decide what you would change before seeing the redesign
• Be ready to explain why your changes would help a decision-maker

Time: 1 minute setup, 4 minutes discussion.

Pair Exercise: Before

What pattern do you think matters most?

What would you change first?

Time: 4 minutes.

Prompt them to think about whether the important message is level or change. The paired bars make improvement and decline harder to see than necessary.

Pair Exercise: After

Decision implication:

Lean further into text outreach and diagnose why direct mail lost effectiveness.

Time: 3 minutes.

Debrief around visual choice: - The before chart emphasized levels by year - The after chart emphasizes change, which is the actual story - Highlighting is intentional rather than decorative

Pair Debrief

• The message was change, not just level
• The chart type now matches the comparison
• Color is used to direct attention
• The title translates evidence into a management takeaway

Time: 2 minutes.

Reverse Engineering

Reverse Engineer an Effective Visual

• What is the main takeaway?
• What design choices make that takeaway easy to see?
• Which parts of the chart focus your attention?
• How does the wording help tell the story?

Time: 4 minutes.

Use this as the closing engagement piece. Have students name what they notice, then map their answers to context, chart choice, clutter reduction, focus, and story.

Checklist

1. Understand the context and decision
2. Choose an apprpriate visual
3. Eliminate clutter
4. Focus attention where you want it
5. Make the takeaway explicit

Time: 3 minutes.

This is the reverse-engineered version of the storytelling-with-data framework.

Final Takeaways

• Analysis is not finished when you get the results
• A good visual helps the audience see what matters quickly
• Good visuals support decisions, not just description
• The rest of this course unit is about moving from technically correct output to effective communication

Time: 2 minutes.

Close by linking forward: labs and later modules will ask students not just for an answer, but for a clear visual argument.