Fathom Data office decision
Pros and cons slide on a balance scale with a verdict
A pros and cons slide that counts points always favours whichever side had more writing time, so each point has to be weighted with a cost, a time or a number. This one belongs to Fathom Data, a fictional consultancy deciding whether to take a Brisbane office, and closes with a verdict rather than a tie.
What is on the slide
- Pros
- Ten of 24 clients within 2km. Six hours a week of travel saved across four staff. Three juniors starting in 2027. A 14 seat room replacing $9,600 a year of hired space. An address two government panels require.
- Cons
- $96,000 a year across the three year term. No break clause under three years. Four of 14 staff live outside Brisbane. Eleven weeks of fit out and approvals. 60% of desks unused at two days a week.
- Verdict
- Take the lease. Sign the three year term only if both government panels are won, because $96,000 a year needs the panel work to carry it.
- Layout note
- Five rows a side with a balance scale roundel on the centre seam, and a full width verdict card at the foot.
When this is the right slide
A pros and cons balance scale suits a single yes or no decision when both sides deserve equal airtime and the slide has to land on a recommendation rather than leave the room to argue.
What to swap it for
Comparison: Pros vs Cons Arrows. Swap to the arrows layout when each side runs to six points and the slide can drop the verdict card, since the arrow treatment gives the rows more room and no footer.
What this slide shows
A title reads A Brisbane Office with the subtitle weighed against staying fully remote. A PROS column on the left and a CONS column on the right each hold five rows of icon, heading and one supporting line, separated by a vertical seam with a balance scale roundel on it. The pros are ten of the 24 current clients inside a two kilometre walk, six hours of travel a week saved across the four Brisbane staff, three juniors starting in 2027 where pair work is slower over a call, a 14 seat room that removes $9,600 a year of hired meeting space, and a registered state address required by two government panels. The cons are $96,000 a year of rent, outgoings and fit out spread over the three year term, a landlord who will not write a break clause under three years, four of the 14 staff living outside Brisbane, eleven weeks of fit out and approvals from signing, and 60% of desks unused at current two day attendance. A full width verdict card closes the slide: take the lease, but only if both government panels are won.
When this is the right slide
Use it for a single decision with two sides, where the audience is being asked to approve or reject rather than to choose between options. It suits a leadership meeting, a board paper or a partner discussion about a lease, a hire, a product line or a piece of infrastructure. It is the wrong slide when there are three or more options, since two columns cannot hold a third path and forcing one in produces a false binary; three option cards handle that. It is also wrong when the pros and cons are not really comparable, for example when one column is money and the other is culture, unless the verdict card explicitly says how the trade was made. And it is wrong without a verdict, because five against five with no recommendation sends the decision back to the room.
How to adapt it
First, weight rather than count. Give every row a figure so a reader can compare magnitudes, and if a point genuinely has no number, say why in the row rather than leaving it bare. Second, write the verdict before the columns. A recommendation written last tends to describe whichever side ended up longer; a recommendation written first forces the author to list the strongest arguments against their own position. Third, name the condition that would change the answer. Here it is winning both panels, which is checkable. A verdict with a condition survives the meeting, because when the condition fails the decision reverses without another round of debate.
What makes this slide work
Every point carries a cost or a time
Ten of 24 clients, six hours a week, three juniors, $9,600 of hired space, two panels. On the other side $96,000 a year, three years, four of 14 staff, eleven weeks, 60% of desks. Five against five would be a tie on count, but the figures let a reader weigh $96,000 against $9,600 and six hours, which is the argument the slide is actually about.
The verdict names a condition, not a preference
Take the lease, but only if both government panels are won, because $96,000 a year needs the panel work to carry it. That turns the slide from a debate into a decision with a test attached, and it gives the meeting something to check in three months rather than a view to argue about again.
The scale sits between the columns, not under them
The balance roundel on the centre seam tells the audience these two columns are being weighed against each other before a single word is read. A pros and cons slide laid out as two stacked lists reads as two separate topics; the seam and the scale are what make it one question.
Questions people ask
How many pros and cons belong on one slide?
Five a side on this layout, and the two sides have to match in number. An uneven split looks like the argument was decided before the list was written, even when it was not. If one side genuinely has seven points, group the weaker two into one row rather than letting the columns run to different lengths.
Why weight the points instead of counting them?
Because counting rewards whoever wrote more rows. One con worth $96,000 a year outweighs three pros worth a few thousand between them, and only a figure on each row makes that visible. Weighting also stops the familiar trick of splitting one advantage into three lines to win the count.
Should a pros and cons slide include a recommendation?
Yes, on this layout, which has a verdict card built into the foot. A balanced list with no recommendation hands the decision back to the room and usually ends in another meeting. The strongest verdicts name a condition, so the decision can be checked later rather than re-argued from the beginning.
What if the two sides are not comparable?
Say how the trade was made, in the verdict. Money against culture, or speed against risk, cannot be netted off on a slide, so the honest approach is to state the exchange rate the decision maker is using. If that cannot be stated, the slide is not ready and the decision is being made on something not yet written down.
When should a pros and cons slide be split in two?
Split when one point needs evidence of its own, such as the full cost model behind the $96,000. Split also when the decision has more than two paths, in which case the layout is wrong rather than crowded: three option cards give each path its own criteria and avoid presenting a three way choice as a binary.
How should this slide be presented out loud?
Read the verdict first, then the two rows that drive it, then stop and take questions. Working through all ten rows takes three minutes and leaves the room with no idea what is being recommended. The slide exists so people can check the reasoning after the recommendation, not so it can be read aloud.
Build your own in about a minute
The button below opens the generator with this use case already described. Change the wording to match your own, generate, then edit anything you like.
Make one like thisOther slide examples
Problem bridge solution slide with three numbered steps
A problem and solution slide asks an audience to accept a jump, and one that has heard the same promise before will not make it, which is what the middle column is for. This one belongs to Northgate Council, a fictional council, and the bridge names the three steps that took a minor works permit from fourteen days to three.
Before and after slide example with two matched columns
A before and after slide works when the two columns pair line for line, because an audience reads across rather than down and a mismatch shows up instantly. This one belongs to Dockside Cafe, a fictional cafe, and compares the same ordering process before and after a change in March.
Callout comparison table slide with a verdict and the evidence
A callout comparison table slide puts the decision first and the evidence beside it, so nobody has to infer the recommendation from a grid of cells. This one belongs to Aurora Aged Care, a fictional provider choosing a rostering system for three homes.
Want the steps in the builder? Read Add, reorder and restructure slides, then Style text and add callouts, stats and lists. For everything this generator can do, see the slide maker.
Written and checked by the OneCraft team. Last checked .