{
  "kind": "framework",
  "value": "benchmarking",
  "collectionKey": "slides:framework:benchmarking:all-document-kinds:all-producers:all-orientations",
  "filters": {
    "documentKinds": [],
    "sourceTypes": [],
    "orientations": []
  },
  "total": 2,
  "page": 1,
  "pageSize": 24,
  "pageCount": 1,
  "rows": [
    {
      "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc",
      "docSlug": "0798c0fb1aaf0664",
      "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017 Materialesamling Del 2",
      "authorId": "BCG",
      "authorName": "BCG",
      "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck",
      "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck",
      "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting",
      "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting",
      "presentationDate": null,
      "orientation": "landscape",
      "aspectRatio": 1.445,
      "pageNumber": 18,
      "slideType": "impact_sizing",
      "function": "quantify_impact",
      "notes": "The slide uses a 5% benchmark validated by BCG based on international defense experience. The chart shows a 3-year average (2020-2022) of 45 million DKK.",
      "imagePath": null,
      "matchCount": 1,
      "evidence": "Uses a 5% benchmark validated by BCG based on international experience.",
      "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc/18",
      "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc",
      "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc#slide-18",
      "loopMatches": [
        {
          "to": 27,
          "from": 9,
          "name": "So What Cascade",
          "slug": "41-so-what-cascade",
          "bestFor": "Data presentations, executive summaries, driving to recommendations",
          "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-45efc998ae59",
          "evidence": "Problem statement -> segmentation -> diagnosis -> IPT recommendation -> 45 mio. kr. potentiale -> implementation plan.",
          "position": 1,
          "objective": "Frame procurement-coordination problem and recommend Integrated Project Teams",
          "structure": "The Data -> So What? (Insight 1) -> So What? (Insight 2) -> So What? (The Action)",
          "confidence": 85,
          "description": "Chain insights together, each answering 'so what?' until you reach the actionable conclusion"
        }
      ],
      "arcBeatMatches": [
        {
          "to": 18,
          "from": 9,
          "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-200ed114be36",
          "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit",
          "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit",
          "beatName": "Problem & Complication",
          "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication",
          "evidence": "First proposal's problem statement: 'manglende koordination mellem FMI og brugere'.",
          "position": 2,
          "confidence": 92,
          "parentBeatName": "Complication",
          "parentBeatSlug": "complication"
        },
        {
          "to": 165,
          "from": 9,
          "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-30a6df91c9fe",
          "arcName": "The Triple Take",
          "arcSlug": "triple-take",
          "beatName": "The Facts (What)",
          "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what",
          "evidence": "Baselines, segmentations, current-state diagnoses dominate first half.",
          "position": 1,
          "confidence": 70,
          "parentBeatName": "Setup",
          "parentBeatSlug": "setup"
        }
      ],
      "imagePathAlt": null,
      "thumbSrc": null,
      "thumbSrcAlt": null,
      "locked": true
    },
    {
      "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180",
      "docSlug": "62a3ea47159781a7",
      "documentTitle": "Forsyningssektorens Effektiviseringspotentiale",
      "authorId": "McKinsey",
      "authorName": "McKinsey",
      "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck",
      "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck",
      "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting",
      "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting",
      "presentationDate": null,
      "orientation": "landscape",
      "aspectRatio": 1.333,
      "pageNumber": 42,
      "slideType": "impact_sizing",
      "function": "quantify_impact",
      "notes": "The slide uses DEA and SFA benchmarking models to calculate efficiency scores and potential savings.",
      "imagePath": null,
      "matchCount": 1,
      "evidence": "DEA and SFA models used for efficiency scoring",
      "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180/42",
      "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180",
      "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180#slide-42",
      "loopMatches": [
        {
          "to": 60,
          "from": 41,
          "name": "Cost Of Inaction",
          "slug": "27-cost-of-inaction",
          "bestFor": "Urgent budget requests, compliance, risk mitigation",
          "matchId": "38e66459-da51-4138-b562-c585054351a0",
          "evidence": "The document highlights the potential consequences of not addressing the barriers.",
          "position": 2,
          "objective": "To outline the consequences of not addressing the barriers.",
          "structure": "The Status Quo -> The Hidden Costs Accumulating -> The Future State of Inaction -> The Tipping Point",
          "confidence": 0.7,
          "description": "Quantify what happens if the audience does nothing"
        }
      ],
      "arcBeatMatches": [
        {
          "to": 60,
          "from": 41,
          "beatId": "b4d717e7-3337-4c26-af4b-809d56477c6c",
          "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit",
          "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit",
          "beatName": "Impact & Next Steps",
          "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-impact-next-steps",
          "evidence": "The document outlines various initiatives and regulatory changes to address the barriers.",
          "position": 3,
          "confidence": 0.8,
          "parentBeatName": "Resolution",
          "parentBeatSlug": "resolution"
        }
      ],
      "imagePathAlt": null,
      "thumbSrc": null,
      "thumbSrcAlt": null,
      "locked": true
    }
  ]
}