Report writing: you don't have to be a desktop publishing guru to illustrate facts and figures effectively. Jon Moon offers his guide to providing information with impact.
| Author | Moon, Jon |
| Position | Technical matters |
Imagine that you produce information packs and reports that people praise and envy--documents that influence, impress and set the benchmark for all others in your organisation. Imagine the impact of this on your working life.
The reality is different for most of us. We churn out documents that don't seem to hit the mark and we aren't too sure why. But we say to ourselves that this is simply the way things are, and we comfort ourselves with the thought that they are as close to being as good as they can be.
In most cases, though, they aren't. Rather, they're like the early maps of the London Underground. Before Harry Beck produced his iconic design in 1932, the Tube map was a literal representation of where the trains ran and everyone thought it was fine. Beck's brilliant new map straightened things up and opened people's eyes to how much better it could be. And so it is with most business information: most people don't realise how much more effectively it can be displayed.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
Let's look at some common ways in which people show information and see how much better it can be done. To help you put the tips into practice, some of the following "redos" are free downloads from www.jmoon.co.uk that you can adopt and adapt.
Top of the charts
The graphs in figures 1 and 2 plot the same numbers over time. Figure 1 is awful, but figure 2 is much clearer. Admittedly, I fixed the numbers so that the line graph wouldn't look like the crossing railway lines at Clapham Junction. In the real world, seven years of data rarely conspire to produce such a tidy graph. Usually it's a mess (albeit still less of a mess than the equivalent column chart). In which case, don't show a mess. Show less data--eg, a table that shows each division's total movement over the seven years. Or maybe produce a series of mini-graphs.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
In figure 3 the graph compares the results of a survey of clients' views about the reports, CD-Roms, e-mails and slides produced by four companies. A high score means that clients like them; a low score means they don't. Figure 3 leaves readers to stare at a jungle of anonymous blocks. Instead, try figure 4, which plots the companies' logos. People are familiar with logos and you don't have to put in a legend (which should always be avoided, because readers need to decode it).
Resetting the table
Figure 5 is too spaced out, which means that your gaze has to travel big distances to...
To continue reading
Request your trialCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
