McKinsey · consulting-deck
Forsyningssektorens Effektiviseringspotentiale
234 pages · 4 arc beats · 3 loops
Forsyningssektorens Effektiviseringspotentiale
McKinsey arc beats above · slides in the middle · loops below · scroll → 3 LOOPS
1102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230234
Deck intelligence map
4 coverage by narrative range · generated from this deck JSON
Narrative range 60 total
Metadata
Components
Metrics
Tools
Frameworks
Beats
Loops
Situation & Context 5 slides 100% 5/5 slides 100% 5/5 slides · 23 hits 20% 1/5 slides — 0/5 slides
— 0/5 slides
100% 5/5 slides — 0/5 slides
Problem & Complication 15 slides 100% 15/15 slides 100% 15/15 slides · 105 hits 53.3% 8/15 slides 33.3% 5/15 slides 33.3% 5/15 slides 100% 15/15 slides 100% 15/15 slides Evidence & Proof 20 slides 100% 20/20 slides 100% 20/20 slides · 132 hits 20% 4/20 slides 40% 8/20 slides 20% 4/20 slides 100% 20/20 slides 100% 20/20 slides Impact & Next Steps 20 slides 100% 20/20 slides 100% 20/20 slides · 128 hits 55% 11/20 slides 50% 10/20 slides 45% 9/20 slides 100% 20/20 slides 100% 20/20 slides Slide inventory
234 every slide · same image gating as the playbook
03
The slide sets the context for a study on utility sector efficiency beyond the 3.3 billion DKK political agreement.frame_problem
Open slide detailBeat · Situation & Context
06
The slide outlines the rationale for a 7.1 billion DKK efficiency potential, citing sector fragmentation, regulatory shortcomings, and investment inefficienciessummarize
07
The slide outlines a 3-point plan for utility sector reform including economic regulation, consolidation incentives, and governance improvements.summarize
08
The slide explains the methodology behind the prudence adjustment (best-of-two approach) and lists factors that could increase the potential.quantify_impact
09
Uses a maturity model framework to map utility sectors (waste, gas, electricity, district heating, water) against regulatory regimes.recommend
10
The slide is labeled 'KONKLUSION' (Conclusion) but functions as a list of future research/next steps.state_next_steps
11
The document is in Danish.front_matter
12
The slide uses a waterfall chart to illustrate the additive nature of the two potential sources.quantify_impact
13
The chart compares historical data with 2014-based updated analysis, highlighting a 14.8% increase in total potential.quantify_impact
14
The slide compares a range-based previous estimate (1.3-2.9 DKK bn) with a specific 2.3 DKK bn updated estimate, broken down by sector.quantify_impact
15
The slide uses a waterfall-style logic to bridge 2014 baseline data to 2025 potential, accounting for asset lifespans and productivity growth.quantify_impact
16
The slide uses a waterfall-style logic to reconcile different efficiency potential estimates. It includes a specific callout box explaining the Malmquist index analyze_data
17
The slide uses a waterfall chart to illustrate the components of efficiency potential (Direct, Consolidation, and Additional/Dynamic).present_framework
19
The slide uses a matrix to show which barriers apply to which utility sectors (water, wastewater, heating, electricity, gas, waste incineration).diagnose
20
The slide uses a table to map sectors to specific regulatory or structural barriers and their negative impacts on incentives.diagnose
22
The slide uses a checkmark system to denote essential vs supporting initiatives, with numbered footnotes indicating specific sector-level nuances.prioritize
23
The slide uses a matrix structure to categorize 15 distinct initiatives across 5 sectors plus cross-sector initiatives.prioritize
24
The slide uses a structured approach to evaluate a regulatory initiative, balancing benefits and risks while listing technical requirements.present_solution
25
The slide uses a structured approach to evaluate a regulatory initiative, including a callout for an expert committee (WACC-udvalget).present_solution
26
The slide uses a structured approach to evaluate a policy initiative, contrasting pros/cons with implementation requirements.present_solution
27
Initiative 3 in a series.present_solution
28
The slide outlines a specific initiative (number 4) regarding board composition in the utility sector, detailing the problem, benefits, drawbacks, and prerequispresent_solution
29
The slide outlines the benefits, potential drawbacks, and regulatory prerequisites for corporatizing municipal utility services.recommend
30
The slide uses a structured approach to evaluate a specific regulatory initiative.present_solution
31
The slide outlines the rationale, benefits, potential drawbacks, and regulatory prerequisites for this incentive mechanism.present_solution
32
Part of a series of initiatives (labeled '8').recommend
33
The slide is part of a list of initiatives (labeled '9').prioritize
34
The slide uses a structured approach to evaluate the initiative, splitting it into benefits/drawbacks and implementation prerequisites.prioritize
35
The slide outlines the initiative, its pros/cons, and the prerequisites for effective regulation.present_solution
38
The slide uses a three-column structure: Characteristics, Barriers, and Initiatives.present_solution
39
Includes methodology notes on DEA/SFA models and sensitivity analysis regarding infrastructure factors.quantify_impact
40
The chart uses a waterfall structure to show the additive nature of different cooperation types towards the total sector potential.quantify_impact
41
The slide uses a map of Denmark to visualize company locations and regional statistics, supported by bar charts showing average distances and total number of posize_opportunity
42
The slide uses DEA and SFA benchmarking models to calculate efficiency scores and potential savings.quantify_impact
43
The chart uses a waterfall structure to show the additive potential of different cooperation types.quantify_impact
44
The slide uses a map of Denmark to visualize company locations and regional statistics, supported by bar charts showing distance and potential partners.analyze_data
45
The slide uses a structured table format to categorize barriers (e.g., dividend restrictions, political interference, administrative burden).frame_problem
46
Part 2 of 2. The slide uses a table format to map barriers to their specific impacts on efficiency and consolidation.diagnose
48
The slide acts as a signpost to detailed appendix sections for each initiative.present_solution
50
The slide uses a three-column structure to present sector characteristics, barriers, and initiatives, supported by a waterfall chart showing efficiency potentiadiagnose
51
The slide uses a 'best-of-two' model (DEA and SFA) to calculate efficiency potential, excluding fuel costs and including heat loss value.quantify_impact
52
The chart breaks down potential savings into Service, Operations, and Investment collaboration, totaling 394 DKKm.quantify_impact
53
Includes a map of Denmark with regional statistics and two bar charts illustrating distance to nearest company and potential cooperation types.analyze_data
54
The slide uses a structured table format to map barriers to their impacts, typical of a diagnostic consulting slide.diagnose
55
The slide uses a table structure to compare strategic initiatives. Some rows span the entire width for cross-references to other pages.prioritize
56
The slide uses a table structure to present policy initiatives. Several rows refer to other pages for detailed descriptions.prioritize
58
The slide uses a three-column structure to present the current state, challenges, and potential solutions.diagnose
59
The slide uses DEA (Data Envelopment Analysis) to calculate efficiency scores and potential savings.quantify_impact
60
The chart breaks down potential savings into CAPEX and OPEX components across different types of collaboration (service, operations, infrastructure).quantify_impact
61
Includes a map of Denmark with company locations, bar charts for distance and collaboration types, and regional statistics.analyze_data
62
The slide uses a structured table to map barriers to their impacts, serving as a diagnostic tool for industry challenges.diagnose
64
The slide acts as a summary table pointing to specific pages for detailed descriptions of each initiative.present_solution
66
The slide uses a three-column structure to present the current state, challenges, and recommendations.diagnose
67
The slide compares efficiency gaps across three companies to derive a total sector potential.quantify_impact
68
The chart uses a waterfall structure to decompose the total potential of 35 DKKm into three categories.quantify_impact
69
The slide uses a map to illustrate that despite non-overlapping service areas, full collaboration is feasible.analyze_data
70
The slide uses a structured table to map barriers to their respective impacts on efficiency and consolidation.frame_problem
71
The slide uses a structured table format to present strategic recommendations.prioritize
72
The slide uses a table structure to present initiatives, referencing other pages for detailed analysis.prioritize
74
The slide uses a three-column structure to map the current state, the problems, and the solutions.diagnose
75
The slide uses a waterfall-style chart to show the breakdown of waste treatment volumes.diagnose
76
The slide uses DEA and SFA models to calculate efficiency scores and potential savings.quantify_impact
77
The chart uses a waterfall structure to show how individual collaboration potentials sum up to a total sector potential of 122 DKKm.quantify_impact
78
The slide uses a map of Denmark to visualize regional capacity and bar charts to show distance to nearest company and types of collaboration.diagnose
79
The slide uses a structured table format to diagnose systemic issues in the Danish waste incineration sector.diagnose
80
The slide is part 2 of 2. It uses a structured table format to map barriers to their impacts.diagnose
82
The slide is mostly empty, suggesting it is a template or a placeholder for further analysis.prioritize
83
The slide uses a three-column structure to map sector characteristics to barriers and then to recommended solutions.diagnose
84
The slide uses a classic 'Situation-Barrier-Recommendation' structure.present_solution
85
The slide uses a three-column structure to present sector characteristics, barriers, and recommendations.diagnose
87
The slide uses a waterfall-style diagram to conceptualize the additive nature of different efficiency potentials.quantify_impact
89
The slide uses a waterfall chart to illustrate the components of efficiency potential (Direct, Consolidation, Dynamic, and Total).diagnose
90
The chart compares CAPEX and OPEX per customer across 19 European companies. The slide highlights a 10% lower total cost for the Danish leader compared to the ncompare_peers
91
The slide uses a bar chart to compare operational costs per customer across 15 anonymized companies, highlighting the Danish company's position relative to the compare_peers
92
The slide uses a scenario-based approach to estimate potential efficiency gains by 2025, building on historical productivity data from the economy, utilities, aquantify_impact
93
The slide uses a scenario-based approach to estimate future efficiency gains by applying productivity growth rates to the cost base.quantify_impact
95
The slide uses a structured list format to detail specific barriers to efficiency in the Danish utility sector.frame_problem
97
The slide uses a vertical gradient arrow on the left to represent increasing incentive levels.compare_options
98
The slide contrasts two regulatory models and discusses the resulting requirements for the regulatory body.frame_problem
100
The slide uses a table-like structure to contrast 'Overinvesteringer' and 'Investeringer udenfor kerneaktiviteten' with their descriptions and rationales, folloframe_problem
102
The slide uses a two-column layout to contrast the significance of current rules with the need for harmonization.frame_problem
103
The slide uses a comparative structure to contrast current regulatory issues with the potential benefits of standardization.frame_problem
105
The slide uses a comparison table structure to contrast feedback for 'Forsyningssekretariatet' and 'Energitilsynet' across three themes: Trust, Resource Allocatframe_problem
106
The slide contrasts two regulatory bodies in the UK utility sector, detailing their establishment, functions, and specific engagement processes with industry stcompare_options
108
The slide serves as a transition to a detailed analysis of different corporate structures in the utility sector.frame_problem
109
The slide uses stacked bar charts to represent the distribution of organizational types within each utility sector.analyze_data
110
The table compares five types of entities: Municipal administration, § 60-joint venture, A/S and ApS, Self-governing institutions, and A.m.b.a.compare_options
111
The slide provides a structured evaluation of municipal utility organizational forms based on a government report.compare_options
112
The slide uses a table-like structure to map categories of barriers (Influence/Info, Investment/Economy, Other) to potential mitigation initiatives.frame_problem
113
The slide uses a comparison table structure to contrast pre- and post-corporatization states across four dimensions.illustrate_case
115
The slide uses a numbered list to define governance standards, supported by academic and industry citations.present_framework
116
The slide uses a stacked bar chart to show the number of municipal council members on utility boards across different sectors.frame_problem
117
The slide uses a transition arrow to link the definition of board roles to the requirement for specific competencies.frame_problem
118
The slide uses two stacked bar charts to illustrate the lack of competency profiles and the prevalence of specific skills in boards.diagnose
119
The slide uses a bar chart to compare specific utility sectors (water, heating, electricity, gas, waste) against a 'best practice' range of 5-9 members.compare_peers
120
The slide is in Danish. It outlines the structure of the report including sector-specific analysis, cross-sector challenges, and appendices.front_matter
121
The slide uses a structured argument flow: identifying the overlap, detailing the specific areas of overlap, and concluding with the risk of compromised indepenframe_problem
123
The slide uses a two-column layout to contrast specific analytical parameters with general investment criteria.frame_problem
124
The slide uses a structured list format to categorize qualitative feedback from investor interviews.frame_problem
126
The slide uses a three-column layout to detail specific problem areas related to municipal boundaries.frame_problem
128
The slide uses a table structure to categorize cases into 'Danske case studier' and 'Udenlandske case studier', mapping them to descriptions and key learnings.illustrate_case
129
The slide highlights the trade-off between operational efficiency and local municipal control.illustrate_case
130
The slide uses a three-column structure to map motivations to barriers/solutions and outcomes.illustrate_case
131
The slide uses a case study format to demonstrate operational efficiency gains through economies of scale without layoffs.illustrate_case
132
The slide uses an org-chart to explain the multi-layered holding structure of HOFOR, contrasting it with pros and cons.illustrate_case
133
The slide uses a table format to compare reasons for non-collaboration across two municipalities.illustrate_case
134
The slide uses a map to illustrate the geographic scope of the consolidation and lists four key takeaways.illustrate_case
135
The slide uses a structured table format to map drivers to barriers and their corresponding solutions.illustrate_case
136
The slide uses a matrix-like structure to compare municipalities (rows) against drivers (columns) and qualitative outcomes (right-hand columns).illustrate_case
137
The slide compares pre- and post-consolidation metrics for two entities and lists drivers for efficiency.illustrate_case
138
The slide uses a case study format to illustrate the benefits and limitations of a shared service model in the utility sector.illustrate_case
139
The slide uses a dual-axis chart (bar for owners, line for revenue) combined with a timeline of service expansion and development bullets.illustrate_case
140
The slide uses a matrix-like structure to compare qualitative and quantitative drivers across seven different utility entities.illustrate_case
141
The slide uses a two-column layout: background/facts on the left and key learnings on the right.illustrate_case
142
The slide uses an organizational chart to explain the relationship between the municipality and the utility holding companies.illustrate_case
143
The slide uses a three-column structure to break down the case study into background, motivations, and implications.illustrate_case
145
The slide uses a 'Case Study' label and provides a balanced view by acknowledging future slides will cover challenges.illustrate_case
146
The slide uses a structured table to contrast 'Problemstilling' (Problem) with 'Eksempel observeret' (Observed example) across four key areas: Regulation, Projediagnose
147
The slide uses a structured table to contrast 'Area', 'Problem', and 'Observed Example'.diagnose
148
The slide uses a two-column layout to contrast background facts with key learning points regarding the project's financial viability.illustrate_case
149
The slide uses a structured list format to diagnose specific financial and operational headwinds.diagnose
151
The slide uses a two-column layout to contrast background facts with key learning points.illustrate_case
152
The slide uses a dual-axis chart (bar for investments, line for tariffs) combined with a timeline of regulatory changes.illustrate_case
153
The slide uses a timeline-based matrix to compare regulatory regimes and market behaviors across three distinct periods.illustrate_case
154
The slide uses a structured observation-effect layout to validate the performance of a regulatory framework.illustrate_case
157
RIIO stands for Revenue = Incentives + Innovation + Outputs. The slide maps these components to specific regulatory mechanisms.present_framework
158
Slide indeholder en detaljeret oversigt over RIIO-rammeværket med fire hovedkomponenter og tilhørende grafer for priskontrol og incitamentsstrukturer.illustrate_case
159
The slide illustrates a regulatory process flow (RIIO) and a corresponding decision matrix for DSO evaluation.present_framework
160
The slide uses a waterfall-style chart to show tariff reduction over time, comparing English regulatory periods with Danish tariff increases.illustrate_case
162
The slide uses a structured list format to explain regulatory mechanisms.illustrate_case
163
The slide uses a structured list format to explain regulatory mechanisms (TOTEX, customer satisfaction, KPIs, menu-based regulation).present_framework
166
The slide outlines the scope of work for a project, specifically focusing on mapping potential and developing recommendations for the utility sector.present_framework
169
The slide outlines specific analytical models (TOTEX DEA, SFA, McKinsey framework) applied to Drikke- og spildevand, Fjernvarme, El, Gas, and Affald sectors.present_framework
170
The slide explains the technical approach to benchmarking, comparing DEA (non-parametric) and SFA (parametric) models.present_framework
171
The slide uses a waterfall chart to illustrate how different types of collaboration (service, operations, infrastructure) contribute to the total consolidation present_framework
172
The slide uses a geographic map to define the scope of analysis for utility sector consolidation.present_framework
173
The slide outlines qualitative benefits of consolidation, explicitly noting it is not an exhaustive list.present_framework
174
The slide uses a 2.5% market share threshold to define 'large' companies. Data points include market share percentages and volume percentages.analyze_data
175
The slide uses a stacked bar chart to show potential savings across utility sectors (water, heat, electricity, gas, waste) and a table to list specific case stucite_precedent
176
The slide uses a custom table-chart hybrid to show percentage splits of OPEX/CAPEX potential and asset life.analyze_data
177
The slide uses a waterfall-like logic to show how different cooperation types (service, operations, infrastructure) impact the realization horizon.present_framework
178
Slide 178 from a consulting deck. Uses a bar chart to compare time horizons for consolidation.illustrate_case
179
The slide uses a timeline framework to map the consolidation of six distinct entities into DONG A/S.establish_context
180
The slide outlines a methodology for efficiency and consolidation initiatives in the utility sector.present_framework
182
The slide uses a waterfall-like visualization to show the relationship between TOTEX base and efficiency potential per sector.analyze_data
184
The slide acts as a navigation or index page for technical appendices related to model calculations for water, district heating, electricity, gas, and waste secappendix
185
The slide details the technical approach for benchmarking, including DEA and SFA models, and data cleaning processes.present_framework
186
Data covers 101 water companies and 93 wastewater companies in 2014.analyze_data
187
The slide uses dual-axis charts to show correlation between total expenditure and specific cost components.analyze_data
188
The slide details the methodology for testing cost drivers using OLS regression, evaluating scale assumptions (VRS, IRS, CRS), and identifying outliers using Badiagnose
189
The slide details the econometric validation of a cost model using OLS regression and DEA-based outlier testing.diagnose
190
The slide compares two sectors using SFA (Stochastic Frontier Analysis) models after outlier removal.analyze_data
191
The slide compares different efficiency models (DEA, SFA, Best-of-two) for Drikkevand (Drinking water) and Spildevand (Wastewater).analyze_data
192
The table shows the scaling calculation for Drikkevand (Drinking water) and Spildevand (Wastewater) using different models (DEA, SFA, Best-of-two).quantify_impact
193
The slide compares baseline potential (with corrections) against sensitivity scenarios (without corrections) to demonstrate the impact of asset age and customerquantify_impact
194
The slide uses a custom table structure to show TOTEX base distribution and savings potential percentages.quantify_impact
195
The slide outlines a structure for technical documentation or appendix material related to sector-specific model calculations.appendix
196
The slide uses a comparative matrix structure to contrast two distinct modeling approaches (Production vs. Transport).present_framework
197
The slide highlights a large variance in company size based on total costs and output.analyze_data
198
The slide highlights differences in sample composition and high variance in company size.analyze_data
199
The slide uses dual-axis charts to show the distribution of companies and the correlation between cost (TOTEX) and output metrics.analyze_data
200
The slide details the methodology for testing cost drivers, scale assumptions (VRS, IRS, CRS), and outlier detection using Banker's super efficiency test.diagnose
201
Uses log-linear OLS regression and Banker's super efficiency test for outlier detection.diagnose
202
The slide compares two models: production and transport, showing coefficients, standard errors, and z-values for various cost drivers.analyze_data
203
The slide compares 2014 data (DEA, SFA, Best-of-two) with 2012/13 data. It includes both a summary table and distribution charts (scatter and histogram).analyze_data
204
The slide compares different efficiency models (DEA, SFA, Best-of-two) for 2014 and 2012/13.analyze_data
205
The slide explains the methodology for extrapolating efficiency gains from a subset of the cost base to the entire sector.quantify_impact
206
The slide compares baseline scenarios against sensitivity scenarios for two sectors (Produktion, Transport) across three metrics (TOTEX, Best-of-two potential, analyze_data
207
The slide uses a waterfall-like structure to show cost savings potential as a percentage of TOTEX-base.quantify_impact
209
The slide outlines the DEA (Data Envelopment Analysis) approach used for benchmarking electricity distribution companies.present_framework
210
The slide compares TOTEX, delivered volume, meters, and three types of technical assets across two years for 39 companies.analyze_data
211
The slide uses a combination of Pareto-like distribution charts and bar charts to illustrate market concentration.analyze_data
212
The slide uses a log-linear OLS model and Banker's super efficiency test for outlier detection.diagnose
213
The slide contains a large table of descriptive statistics and six charts (three scatter plots of efficiency scores and three histograms of frequency distributianalyze_data
214
Uses a waterfall chart to decompose the change in potential, supported by bar charts showing TOTEX base and efficiency score changes.quantify_impact
215
The slide compares three models (DEA, SFA, Best-of-two) across two sets of metrics: potential (DKKm) and descriptive statistics of efficiency scores.analyze_data
216
The slide uses a custom visualization combining bar charts with a table structure to show cost-saving percentages.quantify_impact
217
The slide acts as a navigation or reference page for model calculation background material.appendix
218
The slide uses a waterfall-style visualization to show how different activities contribute to total savings potential.quantify_impact
219
The slide acts as a directory or index for technical appendices related to model calculations across five utility sectors.appendix
220
The slide outlines a benchmarking methodology for waste incineration plants using DEA and SFA models.present_framework
221
The slide highlights that samples are comparable, costs have increased due to new capacity, and there is significant variation in plant size.analyze_data
222
The slide uses dual-axis charts and scatter plots to demonstrate economies of scale and capacity utilization in the Danish waste sector.analyze_data
223
The slide details the methodology for validating a cost model using OLS regression, DEA scale assumptions, and Banker's super-efficiency test for outliers.diagnose
224
The slide presents a statistical regression table (SFA) for waste incineration plants.analyze_data
225
The slide compares DEA(CRS), SFA(log linear), and a 'Best-of-two' model. It includes both summary tables and scatter/histogram plots for each.analyze_data
226
The slide compares two different DEA-based models to explain why their potential estimates differ.compare_options
227
The slide uses a waterfall-style logic to show how TOTEX is distributed and where savings are derived.analyze_data
228
The slide highlights that seven plants have a remaining life of under 10 years, representing 10% of total sector capacity.analyze_data
232
The slide presents a side-by-side comparison of data-related criticisms and methodology-related criticisms.diagnose
234
The slide uses a numbered list format to present qualitative findings from stakeholder interviews.summarize