I don't know if you meyers-briggs or not, but one distinction that is helpful for me is the T/F preference. In the appointment it usually means is the person I'm talking to more focused on the facts, strategies, statement of faith, doctrine, etc (T) or connecting with the stories of personal transformation, hearing how the ministry impacts the individual and the community, about how I decided to go into ministry, etc. (F)
A lot of the back-end of the presentation (Who is Reliant, What is my ministry, what is my role) is geared towards that T preference, where the up front is more for the F (who am I, how is the need for the Gospel specifically expressed in my ministry).
If I sense that someone has a strong preference either way I will alter the sorts of things I share in either section, for example in the envisioning story for a T share the specifics of how the strategy and way of doing ministry helped someone grow in their faith (they came to small group, we shared this truth with them) where with an F I might share the more abstract side of things and talk about how their life was different (they experienced a community of people who loved them but challenged them).
Similar to what Karl said I also feel a lot more freedom to scale based on how much time someone has. My wife and I are very long-winded because we both love to teach, and we gave ~220 of those during our initial support-raising, but in the appointments since then I think we have been learning to be more concise and elaborate when people seem interested.