Who needs Powerpoint?

I do, but only sometimes.

It seems that everyone expects speakers/trainers/teachers to have a deck of Powerpoint slides to use when they’re talking. They’re often badly designed and used poorly, but they can be a useful way of making a talk more visual and interesting. However, they can also be a distraction and if overused their impact is reduced.

I probably overuse Powerpoint. It’s easy to do this. Preparing a talk or session on a training course can easily turn into preparing a set of slides which form the structure of the talk and end up being used a speaker prompts. The problem with this is that your talk starts to follow a rigid framework imposed by the default Powerpoint template. I think that Nancy Duarte and Garr Reynolds have it right when the recommend “going analogue” when preparing a talk – i.e. using paper to plan it out. This can free your thought process and allow you to think about how to present your ideas without getting stuck in a Powerpoint induced rut..

From an audience point of view, watching contiuuous streams of slides projected on a screen can become tedious. Its much more interesting if there is some variety in the way material is put across. You’re more likely to keep their attention.

I was running a revision course last week for occupational hygienists preparing to take their Diploma examination. A lot of topics were covered during the week. For the first three days I’d used some slides for some, but not all of the sessions. I’d tried to avoid too many “lectures” and involved the delegates in discussions and group activities.

On the fourth day of the course we started with an open session. I’d asked the delegates to go through past some exam questions the previous evening and decide which questions they’d like to talk through in the class. This meant that I only had a broad view of we’d need to talk about. The session inevitably threw up some topics where the delgates didn’t have much knowledge and were looking to me to help them fill the gaps. I could have started opening up relevant presentations from my laptop but instead we just had a general discussion and where I needed to fill in some details I relied on description and the old fashioned “talk and chalk” approach, using a flip chart. It was really refreshing to do this from my perspective and the delegates seemed to like it too.

I didn’t switch the projector on all day . For the other sessions I used techniques such as brainstorming, breakout groups an, where I had to “lecture” I stuck with the flip chart.

Slideware such as Powerpoint is a useful tool, but it’s only one item in our toolbox. Unfortunately it’s overused. Its refreshing to use other techniques and I think we all benefited from a “Powerpoint free” day.

What's a "confined space"?

I recently received the following query regarding the application of the Confined Space Regulations 1997:

“is the intent that any room that has a hazard in it is considered a Confined Space? Let’s say we have a room with 2 doors, some general dilution and exhaust ventilation, and has a CO2 line running through it with several flanged connections. The line has never leaked, but I suppose it could if something breaks. Is that a confined space according to the regs?”

The term “confined space” has a particular legal meaning. Once a space is defined as such then the requirements of the “Confined Spaces Regulations 1997″ become applicable and employers are required to

• avoid work in the confined space “as far as reasonably practicable”
• where work is necessary, ensure that there is a safe system of work
• make arrangements to safely rescue anyone who becomes incapacitated within the confined space.

It isn’t true that any room containing a hazard would be considered as a “confined space”. However, I would probably categorise the situation described in the query as such. I once had to deal with a similar situation – a pub cellar where there are CO2 cylinders. There was a risk of a cylinder “bursting” which could release gas into the room. HSE does include “unventilated or poorly ventilated rooms” as an example of a confined space in their guidance on the Regulations in their guidance leaflet, indg258 .

Our British approach is a little woolly, but allows flexibility. The crucial questions to answer when deciding on whether something is a “confined space” are

1. Is the room “substantially” enclosed? i.e. is access / egress limited?
2. Is a potential hazard present in the room ( or one is “reasonably foreseeable”)?
3. In the case of a hazardous gas/vapour/fume/dust, is ventilation limited so that a dangerous concentration is possible?

If the answer to each of these is “yes”, particularly if access/egress limited, then I’d classify it as a confined space and the Confined Spaces Regulations would apply.

In the example given in the query, it appears that there is limited access/egress and there is a reasonably foreseeable risk (albeit small) of a leak. If the concentration could build up to a dangerous level than I’d definitely classify it as a confined space under the Regulations. So the crucial test is whether a leak would lead to a dangerous concentration.

Detailed guidance on the Regulations are available here