Start with the work for the next phase
Consider an energy project preparing for a feasibility review. Its draft team slide has four headings: leadership, engineering, finance and community. Those categories describe capabilities but leave the reader to work out who owns the model, the connection study and the land discussions.
Replace the categories with the work being prepared for review. The example below assigns an internal owner to each workstream and shows supporting roles separately. Grid and cost consultants are still to be appointed; a legal adviser is already appointed.
The roles and appointment statuses are invented for this editing example, not a Pitchwave client team. In your deck, use the agreed work plan and current appointments.
Owners are assigned; two specialist appointments remain open.
| Workstream | Workstream owner | Support and status |
|---|---|---|
| Connection study | Development lead | Grid consultant — to appoint |
| Feasibility model | Finance lead | Cost consultant — to appoint |
| Land discussions | Development lead | Legal adviser — appointed |
| Stakeholder engagement | Community lead | Internal team — assigned |
↳ “To appoint” stays visible. A planned specialist is not presented as part of the appointed team.
Separate ownership from specialist input
In this example, the development lead owns the connection-study workstream; a grid consultant would carry out a defined technical scope. Showing both explains who keeps the work moving and where specialist input is needed. An adviser reviewing a deliverable is not automatically its delivery owner.
The Open University describes a responsibility assignment matrix as a way to connect work with people’s roles. The slide uses that connection at a lighter level. Keep the detailed allocations in the project plan; show the responsibilities that matter to the next conversation.
Use your organisation’s actual allocation of responsibility. Public-sector guidance from the Scottish Government likewise stresses clearly defined roles. Neither source determines who should hold a particular role on your project.
Add experience that explains the allocation
Once ownership is clear, add a short, verified experience line for the people the audience needs to assess. For the connection-study owner, relevant experience could concern coordinating a comparable technical scope. For the finance lead, it could concern responsibility for a comparable model or investment case.
Describe the person’s actual contribution. An employer’s project portfolio is not automatically an individual’s delivery record, and an advisory role should not read like a full-time project appointment. Use names and organisations only when their involvement can be described accurately and shared appropriately.
Give open appointments a next step
An open supporting role is a question to resolve. Say who owns the appointment and which work it must precede. In the example, the development lead needs a plan for appointing grid support; the finance lead needs one for cost support. Add the actual timing or decision gate when it is known.
Before circulating the deck, ask the named owners to confirm the work allocation, supporting roles and current status. Assignment alone does not establish availability: if capacity or time commitment matters to the next phase, make it explicit rather than letting the reader assume it.
Send me your team slide and the work planned for the next phase.