Gratuitous repost here, from Forbes – Vinod Khosla’s Five-Second Rule:

A Sanity Check for Every Presentation

By any measure, Vinod Khosla is one of the most influential people in business today. In his long and distinguished career, Mr. Khosla has contributed to the growth of hundreds of companies, primarily in his role as a venture capitalist; first at the renowned KPCB, and then, since 2004, at his own firm, Khosla Ventures. Among his notable successes are Sun Microsystems, Nexgen/AMD, Excite, and Juniper.

On their way to maturity, each of the many companies Mr. Khosla touched came under the scrutiny of his expert eye, assessing their business plans, balance sheets, strategic relationships, marketing materials, and especially their presentations. During his 25 years in venture capital, Mr. Khosla has seen as many—if not more—presentations than a presentation coach. Most of them were on Mondays, the day Silicon Valley venture firms traditionally allocate to screening pitches from new companies. Then, once the companies make it into the portfolio, Mr. Khosla continues to monitor and critique the presentations they develop to pitch to their potential customers and partners.

For each of them, he applies his five-second rule: he puts a slide on a screen, removes it after five seconds, and then asks the viewer to describe the slide. A dense slide fails the test—and fails to provide the basic function of any visual: to aid the presentation.

By applying his simple rule, Mr. Khosla is addressing two of the most important elements in presentation graphics: Less is More, a plea all too often sounded by helpless audiences to hapless presenters; and more important, the human perception factor. Whenever an image appears on any screen, the eyes of every member of every audience reflexively move to the screen to process the new image. The denser the image, the more processing the audiences need. At that very moment, they stop listening to the presenter. Nevertheless, most presenters continue speaking, further compounding the processing task. As a result, the audience shuts down. Game over.

The simple solution to this pervasive problem is one that readers of my books will recognize: use television news programs as a role model. With vast high-tech graphics resources at their disposal, all the broadcasters show is a simple image composed of a picture and one or two words to serve as a headline for the story that the anchor person tells. In presentations, consider yourself as the anchor person, and design slides that pass Mr. Khosla’s five-second test to serve as the headline for your story.

Game on!

Moving to San Francisco

December 3, 2011

In January Liz and I will will be making the move to San Francisco. I will be joining Atlassian’s marketing team in San Francisco, squarely focused on the Agile software development space.

This is bittersweet opportunity for me. I will be working with an excellent crew in San Francisco, and I’ve got so much to learn. On the other hand it means leaving the GreenHopper team on a day to day basis, the team absolutely rocks – I love you guys.

First up in the new role is getting out The Kaizen Project, a site with guides and tips for those teams which are new to Agile and those which are looking to continually improve their development practices. I can’t wait to get this out there, and share the behind the scenes details.

On a disappointing note I won’t be heading to Agile India in February. My talk got accepted but it looks like the E-3 visa will arrive in January which means Liz and I will be right in the middle of relocation come early February. Next time. Bryce Johnson of the Atlassian Build Engineering team will be speaking, as will Patrick Debois of the Hosted Infrastructure Team, put them on your list to meet and greet.

Tips for restaurants or squash courts in San Francisco? Let me know in the comments below or via Twitter. Cheers!

I’m titling this blog November 2011 Scrum vs Kanban Turf War as I figure we are bound to see more skirmishes between Scrum and Kanban over the coming year. I believe that money is the motivation behind the latest wave of discourse between the Scrum evangelists and Kanban proponents, let me explain.

Two years ago we didn’t have the Lean-Kanban University. Two years ago most folks had not heard of Kanban, it was simply a niche group of early adopters that were iterating on their process trying to find something that gave them greater velocity through waste reduction while retaining high quality deliverables. The Kanban proponents, led by David Anderson, built up a body of knowledge over the past five years or so. This body of knowledge was captured in Kanban: Successful Evolutionary Change for your Technology Business.

Scrum, and organisations like Scrum Alliance, have had a ten year head start on a journey converting teams to agile methodologies. They have done an absolutely amazing job of educating development teams how to work more effectively and deliver software that customers want. There are thousands of Scrum teams around the world and Scrum is still the main approach new Agile teams adopt.

Why are members of the Scrum and Kanban community at loggerheads? Well simply put it is the pending arrival of initiatives such as the Lean-Kanban University and the Certified Kanban Master. The Scrum Alliance is concerned that they will lose their prominence in the market for training and consulting to a younger and nimbler upstart. How many times have we heard that story? How does it usually play out?

There are a few aspects of the article by Jim Coplien which demonstrate he does not have an accurate understanding of how “Kanban” the word has been adopted by the software development teams to mean more than simply “card” and what is found in the Toyota Production System. Kanban isn’t about time boxed work in sprints. There is nothing precluding you from pairing in a Kanban team. Kanban is being used successfully by product teams.

Based on recent research provided in a report by Evans Data there is plenty of room for growth of both of these organisations, and ample opportunity too. Teams should chose the approach that works best for them and continually improve that. This isn’t and “either or” discussion, you can take the best from both approaches!

What do you think? Leave a comment below and share your thoughts.

UPDATE: A pragmatic approach to Scrum vs Kanban can be found in Liz Keogh’s article Scrum and Kanban, both the same only different.