Every cell's Presentation phase runs on a pair of artifacts. The analytical workbook is the complete, unopinionated record of the model results - every contribution, every level, every period. The client deck (the Model Read-out Deck from module 0.3's deliverable arc) is a curated story built FROM the workbook. The methodology workbook's own process SOP captures the sequence in its closing steps: update all model levels into the workbook, update the deck from the workbook numbers, deliver the deck with storytelling.

That ordering is a discipline, not a description. The workbook is upstream and authoritative; the deck is downstream and derived. Nobody types a number into a deck from memory - it comes off a workbook tab, and anyone challenged on a deck figure must be able to walk it back to the tab it came from.

The market workbooks follow a common template (the NL FabClean master workbook is the structural parent that other market workbooks are evidently copied from - roughly 40 sheets). The recurring families of tabs:

Notice how the tab families line up with the KPI families from module 0.3: decomposition tabs answer contribution questions, YoY pivots answer due-to questions, spend tabs supply every ratio's denominator. A read-out deck is, mechanically, a walk across these tab families with a story attached.

The transformation from workbook to deck changes three things - and only three:

• Narrative. The workbook states results; the deck argues a case. Slides get headlines, implications, and recommendations. The reader is a decision-maker, not an analyst.
• Selection. The workbook carries everything; the deck carries what matters. A 40-sheet workbook becomes perhaps 25 slides. Choosing what to leave out is most of the craft - and everything left out remains available in the workbook when a client asks.
• Presentation. Rounding for display, chart forms instead of tables, brand colour, annotation. A contribution shown to six decimals in the workbook appears as a clean percentage on the slide.

And one thing must NOT change: the numbers must tie exactly. Every figure on every slide must trace to a workbook cell. Display rounding is presentation; a discrepancy is a defect. If a slide says a channel contributed 28% and the decomposition tab says 26.8%, that is not "close enough for a deck" - it is a broken tie-out, and it is the first thing a sharp client (or a reviewer) will find. When deck revisions accumulate through client review rounds, the tie-out must be re-verified against the workbook each round - stale numbers surviving a re-cut is the most common way decks drift.

The real exhibits: UK HC MMX pairs

The account keeps a ready-made teaching pair: 04. Deck Making - Capability\UK HC MMX\UK WorkBooks (four analytical workbooks: Comfort, Domestos, Persil, Surf) matched with 04. Deck Making - Capability\UK HC MMX\UK Presented Decks (the corresponding final client decks - several with dated revision history visible in the filenames, which lets you watch a deck evolve through client review rounds). Study them for structure: open a workbook and its deck side by side and trace which tab feeds which slide.

Handling rule: both halves of every pair contain real Unilever client numbers. They are reference-only exhibits - study the structure and the mapping pattern, never lift a value into notes, training material, or any synthetic exercise. The capstone provides a synthetic dataset for hands-on deck building.

Selection and tie-out make a correct deck; the insight layer makes a useful one. Working principles for the narrative pass:

• Headline = so-what, not description. "TV ROI was 2.1 in 2024" is a caption. "TV still pays back, but its marginal returns say the next dollar belongs in digital video" is a headline. Every slide title should survive being read aloud on its own, in sequence, as the deck's executive summary.
• Lead with the decision. Open the deck with what you recommend the client do differently, then spend the body earning it. Clients remember the first three slides and the ask; the proof exists so they can trust the ask.
• Contribution vs due-to discipline. When the story is about growth, use the due-to view; when it is about scale, use contribution - and never let one masquerade as the other (module 0.3's most-confused pair). A slide mixing the two without labelling them is a story defect even when every number ties.
• One story per slide. If a slide needs two headlines, it is two slides. Cut supporting exhibits that do not serve the slide's single message - they belong in the appendix.
• Numbers in the appendix tie out too. The appendix is not a dumping ground: every backup table must tie to the workbook with the same rigour as the main body, because the appendix is exactly where a sceptical client goes digging.