A Secret to Presenting Technical Insights: Storytelling

January 19, 2026

Stories are memorable. 

Or, as we like to say at Wolf & Heron, stories stick. Research shows people recall about 5% of statistics but up to 63% of stories. Think of one of your favorite childhood books. Even years later, you likely remember the core idea, and maybe specific details or phrases. Now think about second grade. You certainly learned things, but it’s much harder to recall those details.



When information is wrapped in a story, we’re far more likely to retain it. Story is what sticks.

Stories activate both logic and emotion (boosting recall and persuasion.)

At Wolf & Heron, we help people become more effective communicators and storytellers, not just for the sake of it. We focus on this work because storytellers are more influential. Stories don’t just convey information. They help people make sense of it.


Stories engage your audience on two levels. On a rational level, they help people understand how ideas connect and why conclusions make sense. On an emotional level, they surface the stakes, why the information matters and why action is needed.


Story shouldn’t replace your data. Data builds credibility. Story helps your data insight land, makes it memorable, and moves people toward the action you want them to take.


Want to learn how to transform your data into a story? Join our upcoming webinar on January 22nd: Cut the Clutter: Turning Complex Data into Compelling Stories.

Four people in casual clothes, one on office chair, others on beanbags, having a discussion.

When you wrap data in a story, you give it context and a point.

Share this article

Recent Posts

By Kara Davidson • October 5, 2026
It's never been more important to be yourself. Kara's brother learned this while hiring for his company. He was eight interviews into a search for a new position at this company, and every one of them wasn’t who they said they were on their resume. Some invented their experience. Others leaned so hard on AI that he couldn't find the actual person behind the answers. He was aggravated trying to figure out what was real and what wasn’t. All he knew for sure was that he couldn’t trust his own read, so he handed the search to a recruiter. That's what happens when people can't tell what's real. They get suspicious of everyone. And when one thing about someone seems off, we doubt the whole person: the experience, the credentials, the firm handshake.
By Stephanie Judd • September 21, 2026
Stephanie had a mentor who went straight to ‘here’s what I would do’ the moment Stepanie asked for advice. Although this mentor was extremely well-meaning, the advice she gave was irrelevant and outside of Stephanie’s reality. “Take your clients to the ballet,” she said. But Stephanie lived nowhere near a ballet company, and her clients weren’t local to her. If this mentor had just paused to ask Stephanie a few questions, her insights would have been a lot better formulated.  Most people leading a discussion default to questions that inform them rather than explore possibilities. The difference is subtle, but the impact is huge.
By Stephanie Judd • September 8, 2026
Leaders have to have all the answers, right?  Kara had a coaching client who was facing a big org change and needed to keep her people motivated. She was hyper focused on what she should say and how she’d provide her people with answers. She knew this was a critical moment for building and maintaining trust and engagement on the team. But when Kara asked, “What would you be looking for from your leader in a moment like this?” the client said, “For them to listen to me.” Then why do we try to have all the answers? Why don’t we listen?
By Stephanie Judd • August 3, 2026
Letitia came to Stephanie stressed. She ran a monthly working group and every month felt the same: low attendance, low engagement, and a Q&A section that was mostly just awkward silence. She spent hours preparing a presentation nobody seemed to care about and couldn't figure out what she was doing wrong. When Stephanie asked her to walk through the format, Letitia said they do forty minutes of presentation followed by twenty minutes of Q&A. She selected the topic each month, recruited a presenter (often herself by default because no one ever volunteered), and carried the entire session on her back. Stephanie pointed out something that surprised Letitia, even though it felt obvious to her in retrospect: the format was inadvertently creating a group of observers, not active collaborators. The meeting was designed in a way that encouraged passivity.
Show More