Recommendation slides.

Judges read titles. They glance at charts. They listen for a decision. Recommendation slides fail when the title is a category and the argument is buried in a footnote. The Case Competition trains students to write slides as sentences that could be spoken aloud.

The governing slide comes first.

After the title page, the first content slide should answer the question. “Hold the average fare and introduce an off-peak discount to shift crowding” is a recommendation. “Analysis overview” is not. Put the action, the economic logic, and the first-year effect on that slide. The rest of the deck exists to prove it.

Action titles, not labels.

Replace “Competitive landscape” with “Local chains already own the value occasion; Starbucks should buy frequency, not floor space.” Replace “Financials” with “The plan is cash-flow positive in month 14 if store openings slow by 20%.” If the title is true, the chart has a job. If the title is a noun, the chart is a poster.

Keep one idea per slide. A crowded exhibit from the case can be redrawn as a simpler comparison: before/after, us/them, now/next. Annotate the one bar that matters. Do not make judges hunt.

A practical 10-slide spine.

1. Title, team, decision owner, date.
2. Recommendation and governing logic.
3. Situation and complication.
4. Issue tree or criteria.
5. The binding constraint, with evidence.
6. Options compared.
7. The plan: actions, owners, 90-day sequence.
8. Economics: investment, return, sensitivity.
9. Risks and mitigations.
10. Ask, next step, and appendix map.

Teams in a 24-hour case should freeze this spine early. Polish comes after the argument is stable. In a live 20-minute pitch, speak the titles. If a judge can reconstruct the case from the titles alone, the deck is doing its job.

Use archive photographs and original visual language for practice decks if you wish, but do not decorate a weak recommendation with atmosphere. Continue with judging criteria and 24-hour case strategy.