The most common crime in professional storytelling.
From memory
Think of the last presentation you sat through where someone said things like "we're passionate about innovation" or "our team is world-class." What did you actually feel when you heard those words?
Here's the problem: the higher you climb in an organisation, the more abstract your language becomes. CEOs talk about "synergies." VPs talk about "alignment." Directors talk about "driving value."
None of it lands. None of it sticks. Because the brain doesn't store adjectives — it stores images.
Today's lesson is about one of the most powerful upgrades you can make to any story: replacing what you claim with what someone can see.
If a camera can't film it, it's not specific enough.
Before you say anything in a story, ask: could a camera film this? If the answer is no, you're telling — not showing. Replace the adjective with the evidence.
"She was a brilliant engineer."
"She redesigned the cooling system in a weekend using parts from a hardware store — and it outperformed the original by 40%."
A camera can film someone redesigning a cooling system. It can't film "brilliant."
"The meeting was tense."
"Nobody touched the coffee. The CFO kept clicking his pen. When the CEO finally spoke, she didn't look up from the table."
Untouched coffee, a clicking pen, averted eyes — the listener feels the tension without being told it's there.
"We had massive growth last year."
"In January we had 12 customers. By December we had 340."
Let the audience do the maths. When they conclude it's massive, it's far more powerful than you telling them.
Take the vague version. Make it vivid.
What specific scene, moment, or detail would show this instead of claiming it? Think of what a camera would film. Discuss it, then write your version.
"When our lead developer's mother was diagnosed with cancer, three different team members quietly took over her projects without being asked. She found out a week later when she saw the commit history."
One specific moment. No adjectives. The listener concludes the culture is supportive. That conclusion — the one they reached themselves — is ten times stickier than your claim.
Rewrite each "telling" sentence as a "showing" sentence. Use any of the three techniques: evidence, sensory anchors, or numbers.
Apply the camera test to something real from your professional life.
Think of something you regularly need to communicate at work — a team achievement, a company value, a strategic direction, a lesson learned. Something you've probably described with adjectives before.
Step 1: Write the "telling" version
How would you normally say it? Be honest — include the adjectives and abstract language.
Step 2: Apply the camera test
Rewrite it. Replace every adjective with evidence. Every claim with a specific scene, number, or moment.
Step 3: Tell the "showing" version out loud
Stand up if you can. Deliver it like you would in a real meeting or presentation.
Go back to the origin story you built in Lesson 2. Where did you tell when you could have shown? Find one moment and make it more vivid — then retell just that section.
Spot the technique. Explain why it works. Mix it with what you already know.
For each example, identify which "showing" technique is being used — and explain what makes it effective. Say your answer out loud before revealing.
"When I told the board we needed to pivot, the room went quiet. The chair put down his glasses. The COO started scrolling through her phone. Only the youngest board member looked me in the eye."
Sensory anchors. Glasses put down, phone scrolling, eye contact — physical details that let the listener feel the tension of the room without being told it was "difficult" or "uncomfortable."
"We said we'd reach 1,000 users by Q4. We hit 1,000 in June. By Q4 we had 11,000."
Numbers instead of judgement. The speaker never says "exceeded expectations" or "incredible growth." The numbers tell the story. The listener does the reacting.
"She didn't delegate — she sat at the same bench as the assembly team for three weeks straight, soldering circuit boards with the rest of them until the line was fixed."
Evidence instead of adjective. Instead of "hands-on leader" or "committed manager," the listener sees a specific action — soldering at the bench for three weeks. The character is revealed through behaviour, not labels.
If you were coaching a colleague who kept using vague corporate language in their presentations, how would you explain the "show, don't tell" principle? Speak for about 90 seconds — include at least one example.
From Lessons 1 and 2 — from memory only.
Lesson 1: Story Structures
1. In SCR, what role does the "Complication" play? Why is it the engine of the story?
Lesson 2: Origin Story
2. What's the difference between "The Crack" and "The Struggle" in the Defining Moment method?
1. The Complication creates tension — it's what disrupted the status quo. Without it, there's no reason for the listener to care. It's the gap between "how things were" and "how things need to be."
2. The Crack is the moment — the specific thing that happened (a date, a sentence, a realisation). The Struggle is what came after — the difficulty, the cost, the work of changing. The Crack is a point in time. The Struggle is a period of time.
From memory. No peeking.
1. What is the Camera Test?
2. Name the three "showing" techniques
3. Why is "showing" more powerful than "telling" in professional storytelling?
1. Before you say anything in a story, ask: could a camera film this? If not, you're telling, not showing. Replace the adjective with the evidence.
2. Replace adjectives with evidence. Use sensory anchors. Give the number, not the judgement.
3. Because when the listener reaches the conclusion themselves — from the evidence you've provided — they own it. A conclusion someone reaches is far stickier than a claim someone makes. Showing respects the listener's intelligence and makes them an active participant in the story.
Think about your communication this week — emails, presentations, conversations. Where do you tend to tell when you could show?
How confident are you with that statement right now?
1 = not yet | 5 = absolutely
Next time: The Reframe — turning the same facts into a completely different story.