{ "kind": "framework", "value": "comparison-frame", "collectionKey": "slides:framework:comparison-frame:all-document-kinds:all-producers:all-orientations", "filters": { "documentKinds": [], "sourceTypes": [], "orientations": [] }, "total": 6294, "page": 1, "pageSize": 24, "pageCount": 263, "rows": [ { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-3e15c6e3bf72", "docSlug": "da48f73eb97e2470", "documentTitle": "2018 True-Luxury Global Consumer Insight", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 22, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a comparative table structure to contrast two distinct geographic markets.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide explicitly compares two geographic segments across the same metrics.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-3e15c6e3bf72/22", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-3e15c6e3bf72", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-3e15c6e3bf72#slide-22", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 23, "from": 21, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d40-3156de055353", "evidence": "Three slides build the same conclusion: social #1 (+29pp since 2013), Instagram/Wechat lead, influencer authenticity.", "position": 6, "objective": "Show social media's rise to #1 lever", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 78, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 51, "from": 14, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e38-15ef0d1686df", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Data on casualwear, social, channels, then Millennial & Chinese deep dives", "position": 4, "confidence": 78, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 29, "from": 14, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e38-1d4d961a1538", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Trend data: casualwear, made-in, social, channels", "position": 1, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-41f9eb4ca4a9", "docSlug": "f8987efef196926b", "documentTitle": "2019 True-Luxury Global Consumer I nsight", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 37, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The chart uses a stacked bar format to show the distribution of consumer behaviors (Does not participate, Sell only, Sell and purchase, Purchase only) across three regions.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparing consumer behavior across three distinct geographic regions.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-41f9eb4ca4a9/37", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-41f9eb4ca4a9", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-41f9eb4ca4a9#slide-37", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 37, "from": 36, "name": "Segmentation Split", "slug": "34-segmentation-split", "bestFor": "Customer analysis, market research, resource allocation", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d40-58d69b5f137f", "evidence": "Younger sell / older buy; China sellers vs US buyers.", "position": 7, "objective": "Split 2nd-hand by age and geography to find behavioral asymmetries", "structure": "The Aggregate View -> Segment A Behavior -> Segment B Behavior -> The Insight in the Difference", "confidence": 75, "description": "Divide a whole into meaningful segments to reveal hidden patterns" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 48, "from": 16, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e38-34bd1509e1d8", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Deep-dive data on Collaborations, 2nd-hand, Sustainability, Made-in.", "position": 4, "confidence": 78, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 45, "from": 16, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e38-4abcc7d1fe6d", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Core Insight", "beatSlug": "onion-core-insight", "evidence": "Granular evidence on collaborations, 2nd-hand, sustainability.", "position": 4, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-d1c878ef3f21", "docSlug": "a4e612631d07709f", "documentTitle": "A&M Valuation Insights March 2024", "authorId": "AlvarezMarsal", "authorName": "A&M", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.333, "pageNumber": 3, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "Uses a dot-plot/dumbbell chart style to compare 2022 vs 2023 metrics across industries.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of 2022 vs 2023 metrics across industries", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-d1c878ef3f21/3", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-d1c878ef3f21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-d1c878ef3f21#slide-3", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 5, "from": 2, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3e-c7e0a75b62fd", "evidence": "Sequential charts (MRP, EV recovery, US-vs-CDAX, M&A premia) accumulate evidence about valuation dynamics", "position": 1, "objective": "Build a market-valuation pattern from four evidence pieces", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 70, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 3, "from": 3, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e35-c116fc306610", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "First Layer", "beatSlug": "onion-first-layer", "evidence": "Industry-level EV recovery breakdown across 10 sectors", "position": 2, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Development", "parentBeatSlug": "development" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-6125a76453d4", "docSlug": "5e8f16b1729573fc", "documentTitle": "Embracing the Agent Advantage", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.707, "pageNumber": 6, "slideType": "industry_trends", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide contrasts the efficiency of standardized direct models with the value of localized expertise provided by IAs.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Striking a balance: universal standards vs. localization", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-6125a76453d4/6", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-6125a76453d4", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-6125a76453d4#slide-6", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 6, "from": 5, "name": "Aha Moment", "slug": "03-aha-moment", "bestFor": "Data-heavy sections, research findings, analytical arguments", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e3-65e6394f4b77", "evidence": "Exhibit 1 frames the question (profitability collapse), Exhibit 2 delivers the insight (IA strongest where complexity lives).", "position": 1, "objective": "Use loss data to reveal that IAs still matter in complex lines", "structure": "The Problem/Question -> What the Data Shows -> The Insight", "confidence": 72, "description": "Establish a tension, present data, then deliver the insight that changes everything" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 8, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87db-4efb39333752", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Exhibit 2 shows IA strength in complex products; regional-carrier and evolving-IA narrative.", "position": 3, "confidence": 82, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 6, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87db-5b7a58503914", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Exhibits 1 and 2 deliver quantitative facts.", "position": 1, "confidence": 65, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-648f0e23d8a6", "docSlug": "b0add5c3e5370c49", "documentTitle": "Fast-moving consumer goods: Driving value creation in an era of disruption", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 4, "slideType": "industry_trends", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "Uses a dual-period bar chart comparison to illustrate a shift in sector performance.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparing two distinct time periods to show performance shift", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-648f0e23d8a6/4", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-648f0e23d8a6", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-648f0e23d8a6#slide-4", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 4, "from": 4, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e3-e296348e7de2", "evidence": "Side-by-side rankings: 2006-2016 (#1, TSR 146) vs 2016-2019 (#7, TSR 65) with arrow showing the drop", "position": 1, "objective": "Contrast FMCG's past sector leadership with its recent lag", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 85, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 4, "from": 4, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87db-eabd1b3be5b9", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "FMCG dropped from #1 (2006-16) to #7/10 (2017-19) in TSR ranking", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 4, "from": 4, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87db-fb9479f80989", "arcName": "The Sparkline", "arcSlug": "sparkline", "beatName": "What Is", "beatSlug": "sparkline-what-is-1", "evidence": "FMCG dropped to #7 since 2017", "position": 1, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-21fbbac542b6", "docSlug": "e5f70e8828822558", "documentTitle": "Hyper-disruption demands constant reinvention", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 20, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a grouped bar format to compare two time periods (2023 vs 2021) across 8 categories of risk management activities.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparing 2023 vs 2021 data points to highlight a trend of declining proactivity.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-21fbbac542b6/20", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-21fbbac542b6", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-21fbbac542b6#slide-20", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 20, "from": 18, "name": "Before After", "slug": "21-before-after", "bestFor": "Product demos, process improvements, ROI justification", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fd-712f-b775-30f011d5a722", "evidence": "p.18 confidence gap, p.19 progress chart 2023 vs 2021, p.20 explicit 'less proactive when compared to 2021' delta.", "position": 4, "objective": "Show risk function regression vs. 2021", "structure": "The Old Way (Pain) -> The Moment of Change -> The New Way (Glory) -> The Measurable Delta", "confidence": 82, "description": "Show the dramatic contrast between the old way and the new way through side-by-side comparison" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 20, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820b-fe0d52be3c7f", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "'Risk is everywhere' + 'Organizations need to raise their game' sections lay out the gap", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 26, "from": 13, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820c-1586370e77a1", "arcName": "The Hero's Journey", "arcSlug": "heros-journey", "beatName": "Challenges & Allies", "beatSlug": "heros-journey-challenges-allies", "evidence": "Interconnected web, tech and skills allies", "position": 3, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Development", "parentBeatSlug": "development" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e", "docSlug": "07cb2674ed07a20d", "documentTitle": "January Macro Brief Special edition: 2024 outlook and top 10 macro trends", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 10, "slideType": "industry_trends", "function": "summarize", "notes": "The slide uses a two-column comparison layout to contrast positive and negative economic forces.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Side-by-side comparison of tailwinds and headwinds", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e/10", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e#slide-10", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 8, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d36-dcb220493c54", "evidence": "PMI snapshot, momentum heatmap, cyclical impulses, structural forces, Red Sea risk all aggregate to one conclusion.", "position": 2, "objective": "Synthesize multiple data points into a coherent state of the global economy", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 78, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 4, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820c-ac20a70ee510", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Exec summary + economic outlook data with country PMIs, scenarios", "position": 1, "confidence": 82, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" }, { "to": 17, "from": 8, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820c-bcf9311edd9b", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Sluggish growth, structural forces, scenario risks per region", "position": 2, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-72f287ba0dd2", "docSlug": "1e4ab4ba8602a452", "documentTitle": "Mind the (AI) Gap: Leadership Makes the Difference", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 7, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a comparative bar chart structure to contrast global vs. French AI adoption across three main industry categories.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparing global vs French AI adoption rates across industries", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-72f287ba0dd2/7", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-72f287ba0dd2", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-72f287ba0dd2#slide-7", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 8, "from": 6, "name": "Segmentation Split", "slug": "34-segmentation-split", "bestFor": "Customer analysis, market research, resource allocation", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-d3e6505e9702", "evidence": "p.6 sectors ranked, p.7 'France is winning...', p.8 '...but needs to catch up' — paired contrast across segments.", "position": 2, "objective": "Segment French AI activity by industry to expose where France wins and loses", "structure": "The Aggregate View -> Segment A Behavior -> Segment B Behavior -> The Insight in the Difference", "confidence": 82, "description": "Divide a whole into meaningful segments to reveal hidden patterns" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 8, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87de-329e79fbd794", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "France lags Industrials and Financial Services sectors", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 8, "from": 3, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87de-4290aed50c2d", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Country and sector data on French AI lag", "position": 1, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-78c20c8fd595", "docSlug": "b12bcf596ad5dacd", "documentTitle": "Out @ Work Barometer The Paradox of LGBT+ Talent", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 4, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a color-coded legend to represent levels of openness (To all, To some, No). Germany is highlighted with a dashed red box.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparing LGBT+ openness across multiple countries.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-78c20c8fd595/4", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-78c20c8fd595", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-78c20c8fd595#slide-4", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 6, "from": 3, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e6-547917f6155b", "evidence": "p.3 headline + p.4-6 country comparisons with Germany highlighted in dashed red box.", "position": 1, "objective": "Expose Germany's gap vs international peers on LGBT+ inclusion", "structure": "Our Performance -> Industry Average -> Best-in-Class -> The Gap = The Opportunity", "confidence": 80, "description": "Compare performance against best-in-class to quantify the opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 2, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87de-fbb8a20839d2", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Survey context + country benchmark data + criteria ranking.", "position": 1, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-492f909e2280", "docSlug": "8c480ec665143ca2", "documentTitle": "Pulse of Change Index", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 9, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a color-coded emphasis on 'Talent' to highlight the perception gap.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide compares actual business disruption rankings against C-suite perception rankings.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-492f909e2280/9", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-492f909e2280", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-492f909e2280#slide-9", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 10, "from": 9, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d38-74ad9d2e9468", "evidence": "Index ranks Talent #2 vs leaders' #4 (p9) -> 42% cite skills shortage as top-3 industry-wide (p10).", "position": 3, "objective": "Contrast the Index's talent ranking with leaders' perception and surface the gap", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 82, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 9, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820e-22f5b2ca1a3f", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Core Insight", "beatSlug": "onion-core-insight", "evidence": "Talent perception gap: Index says #2, leaders rank #4", "position": 4, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 9, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820e-2f4759977eab", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Preparedness gaps in tech, AI, and talent perception", "position": 2, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-57aa6db79325", "docSlug": "53a6da293395a220", "documentTitle": "Reimagining the Agenda", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 10, "slideType": "industry_trends", "function": "quantify_impact", "notes": "The slide uses stacked bar charts to compare industry-specific action rates against a cross-industry baseline.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparing industry-specific performance against a cross-industry baseline.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-57aa6db79325/10", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-57aa6db79325", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-57aa6db79325#slide-10", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 10, "from": 6, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d38-e15b911cbe8e", "evidence": "Four consecutive evidence slides (54%, 17%/46%, 37%, +30%) all converging on 'taking outsized action'.", "position": 2, "objective": "Stack multiple action stats into one pattern: CEOs are acting", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 72, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 10, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820e-be1df1b72654", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Section 02 'Actions for Resilience' + diversification/visibility actions", "position": 3, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 15, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820e-ce12047b8831", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "CEOs are reimagining + sustainability is core", "position": 2, "confidence": 65, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-7e1c9fe1bc87", "docSlug": "7a27e27b944e835f", "documentTitle": "Seeing the BIG Picture", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 21, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a heatmap-style table to show influence levels and a qualitative comparison table for channel preferences.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide explicitly compares Hindi and Regional content across multiple metrics.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-7e1c9fe1bc87/21", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-7e1c9fe1bc87", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-7e1c9fe1bc87#slide-21", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 22, "from": 17, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e7-3c2d5bd4e21c", "evidence": "Lights section deep dive: cross-vertical, cross-demographic, regional digital influence", "position": 3, "objective": "Zoom into evolving consumer behavior across cohorts and verticals", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 78, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 22, "from": 13, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e0-193cf5a111bb", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "'Under-indexed on marketing spends and digital capabilities' diagnosis", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 22, "from": 8, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e0-2986d735d600", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Lights: India market data + consumer behavior facts", "position": 1, "confidence": 80, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-671619672db6", "docSlug": "be7f58e911596f6c", "documentTitle": "Strategy at the Pace of Technology", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 11, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a base of 1.0 for 'all other companies' and shows the relative multiplier for 'tech-forward' companies.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparing performance metrics of tech-forward vs other companies", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-671619672db6/11", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-671619672db6", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-671619672db6#slide-11", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 13, "from": 10, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d39-7c9ac3983b89", "evidence": "p10 21% leaders → p11 2.3x ROIC → p12 TRS curve → p13 industry distribution explicitly compares the two groups.", "position": 3, "objective": "Quantify the gap between tech-forward leaders and the rest", "structure": "Our Performance -> Industry Average -> Best-in-Class -> The Gap = The Opportunity", "confidence": 85, "description": "Compare performance against best-in-class to quantify the opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 13, "from": 11, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e31-8c9a97f9fdd7", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Figures 2-4: 2.3x outperformance, TRS curve, 16-industry distribution.", "position": 4, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 13, "from": 4, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e31-94d7135fdca7", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Establishes tech-forward gap and outperformance data.", "position": 1, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-8945cc841bca", "docSlug": "a46d1765417ae6d2", "documentTitle": "The Canadian Venture Opportunity", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 13, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a stacked bar chart to compare total tertiary education attainment and the subset of STEM graduates across 13 countries.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of tertiary education attainment across 13 countries.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-8945cc841bca/13", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-8945cc841bca", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-8945cc841bca#slide-13", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 12, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30e-284413620fba", "evidence": "Framework p.12 then per-dimension peer benchmarks: talent p.13, R&D p.14, startups p.15, scale-up funding p.16, champions p.17.", "position": 3, "objective": "Score Canada vs peers on the 5 success dimensions", "structure": "Our Performance -> Industry Average -> Best-in-Class -> The Gap = The Opportunity", "confidence": 90, "description": "Compare performance against best-in-class to quantify the opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 20, "from": 13, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e1-a5630ba0f030", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Per-dimension peer benchmarks pp.13-17, gaps p.18, competitor moves p.19, valleys-of-death p.20.", "position": 4, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 20, "from": 11, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e1-b0858931eca7", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Section 2 benchmarks reveal gaps, valleys of death and missed opportunity.", "position": 2, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-8945cc841bca", "docSlug": "a46d1765417ae6d2", "documentTitle": "The Canadian Venture Opportunity", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 15, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a dual-encoding approach: bars represent startups per capita, while circles above represent the total number of startups.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of startup density across countries", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-8945cc841bca/15", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-8945cc841bca", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-8945cc841bca#slide-15", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 12, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30e-284413620fba", "evidence": "Framework p.12 then per-dimension peer benchmarks: talent p.13, R&D p.14, startups p.15, scale-up funding p.16, champions p.17.", "position": 3, "objective": "Score Canada vs peers on the 5 success dimensions", "structure": "Our Performance -> Industry Average -> Best-in-Class -> The Gap = The Opportunity", "confidence": 90, "description": "Compare performance against best-in-class to quantify the opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 20, "from": 13, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e1-a5630ba0f030", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Per-dimension peer benchmarks pp.13-17, gaps p.18, competitor moves p.19, valleys-of-death p.20.", "position": 4, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 20, "from": 11, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e1-b0858931eca7", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Section 2 benchmarks reveal gaps, valleys of death and missed opportunity.", "position": 2, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79", "docSlug": "2deda760ae33148f", "documentTitle": "The CEO’s Roadmap on Generative AI", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 14, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a 3-column comparison structure to contrast different levels of LLM investment.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Three-column comparison of strategic options for LLM development.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79/14", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79#slide-14", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 12, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30e-0e904367bedb", "evidence": "Three forks (build new / enhance / fine-tune) with cost comparison and timing decision.", "position": 3, "objective": "Choose model build path and timing", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 82, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 24, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e1-806906270882", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Pillars 1 (golden use cases, model choice) and 2 (workforce, org) worked through", "position": 3, "confidence": 90, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 28, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e1-93235f2deb66", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Use case selection, workforce reshape, risk surface", "position": 2, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79", "docSlug": "2deda760ae33148f", "documentTitle": "The CEO’s Roadmap on Generative AI", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 18, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a 'VS.' separator to contrast two distinct technological impacts on organizational roles.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide explicitly contrasts two technological paradigms (Traditional AI vs Generative AI) and their respective impacts on organizational roles.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79/18", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79#slide-18", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 17, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30e-116b2b01726d", "evidence": "Traditional AI augments managers vs GenAI augments ICs; role redefinition; identity concerns.", "position": 4, "objective": "Contrast traditional AI world vs GenAI-augmented workforce", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 80, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 24, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e1-806906270882", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Pillars 1 (golden use cases, model choice) and 2 (workforce, org) worked through", "position": 3, "confidence": 90, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 28, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e1-93235f2deb66", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Use case selection, workforce reshape, risk surface", "position": 2, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88", "docSlug": "04e00f0265e26e9f", "documentTitle": "The disability inclusion imperative", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 9, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The chart uses a stacked bar format to show the breakdown of labor force status (Not in workforce, Unemployed, Employed).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparing labor force participation between two distinct groups (with vs without disabilities).", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88/9", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88#slide-9", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 9, "from": 7, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3a-6e1725139f7f", "evidence": "29%→37% over time and 37% vs ~76% labor force participation gap.", "position": 2, "objective": "Show employment improvement and gap vs. people without disabilities", "structure": "Our Performance -> Industry Average -> Best-in-Class -> The Gap = The Opportunity", "confidence": 78, "description": "Compare performance against best-in-class to quantify the opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 9, "from": 1, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e32-a8b43c521d11", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Situation & Context", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-situation-context", "evidence": "Cover, preface, ToC, US workforce employment data establishing the situation", "position": 1, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" }, { "to": 19, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e32-be56e502f9fc", "arcName": "The Transformation Tale", "arcSlug": "transformation-tale", "beatName": "Current Reality (Pain)", "beatSlug": "transformation-tale-current-reality-pain", "evidence": "Workforce gap + culture challenge with concealment data", "position": 1, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-99776df762ae", "docSlug": "16813e406087702c", "documentTitle": "True-Luxury Global Consumer Insights 7th Edition", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 12, "slideType": "industry_trends", "function": "summarize", "notes": "The slide uses a split-column layout to contrast temporary vs. permanent trends.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide explicitly contrasts two categories of trends (temporary vs. accelerating) in a side-by-side layout.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-99776df762ae/12", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-99776df762ae", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-99776df762ae#slide-12", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 11, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e2-dd244fc51d76", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Section 2 'TRUE-LUXURY CONSUMER INSIGHTS' interprets 8 trends with 3 deep dives.", "position": 2, "confidence": 85, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" }, { "to": 23, "from": 11, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e2-ef5ee54ed7e5", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "8 trends framework + 2 deep dives (experiential, East-West).", "position": 3, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-99776df762ae", "docSlug": "16813e406087702c", "documentTitle": "True-Luxury Global Consumer Insights 7th Edition", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 23, "slideType": "market_landscape", "function": "frame_problem", "notes": "Uses a metaphorical road fork image to illustrate strategic divergence.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Contrasts two distinct market segments and their respective consumer behaviors.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-99776df762ae/23", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-99776df762ae", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-99776df762ae#slide-23", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 23, "from": 21, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-1e91cb371c10", "evidence": "p22 explicitly: USA -18%, EU -9%, China +14% on extro values; p23 'two diverging directions' question.", "position": 4, "objective": "Contrast Western retreat from extro values vs Chinese acceleration", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 90, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 11, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e2-dd244fc51d76", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Section 2 'TRUE-LUXURY CONSUMER INSIGHTS' interprets 8 trends with 3 deep dives.", "position": 2, "confidence": 85, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" }, { "to": 23, "from": 11, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e2-ef5ee54ed7e5", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "8 trends framework + 2 deep dives (experiential, East-West).", "position": 3, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f", "docSlug": "52e21d70f3295259", "documentTitle": "True-Luxury Global Consumer Insights 9th Edition", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 30, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "diagnose", "notes": "The slide uses a 4-column comparison structure to contrast 'How Brands act' with 'How reality is'.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide explicitly compares brand actions against customer reality across four distinct categories.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f/30", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f#slide-30", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 30, "from": 28, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-06531669633d", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "2,600-journey friction map + 4 brand misconceptions", "position": 4, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 30, "from": 20, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-136fd5efdb3b", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Digital discontent gaps and brand misconceptions", "position": 2, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f", "docSlug": "52e21d70f3295259", "documentTitle": "True-Luxury Global Consumer Insights 9th Edition", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 33, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "Uses a binary 'defense vs offense' framing to contrast two strategic approaches.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Contrasts two strategic approaches (Defense vs Offense) across defined criteria.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f/33", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f#slide-33", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 33, "from": 32, "name": "Before After", "slug": "21-before-after", "bestFor": "Product demos, process improvements, ROI justification", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-43840b359fdb", "evidence": "Iceberg shows 'playbook is there' vs 'write the playbook' (p32) -> defense vs offense (p33).", "position": 7, "objective": "Move from functional-only to functional+emotional CX playbook", "structure": "The Old Way (Pain) -> The Moment of Change -> The New Way (Glory) -> The Measurable Delta", "confidence": 75, "description": "Show the dramatic contrast between the old way and the new way through side-by-side comparison" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 33, "from": 32, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-090e324d7497", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Impact & Next Steps", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-impact-next-steps", "evidence": "Iceberg playbook + strategic touchpoint role choice", "position": 5, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" }, { "to": 33, "from": 32, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-14d555da3350", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Action (Now What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-action-now-what", "evidence": "Master CX + role-per-touchpoint recommendation", "position": 3, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-a2709765f07b", "docSlug": "62c9b2539bf1585b", "documentTitle": "Whats Next Insurance Pricing", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 7, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a comparison table framework to contrast two statistical modeling approaches in the context of insurance ratemaking.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Table comparing GLM and GBM attributes", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-a2709765f07b/7", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-a2709765f07b", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-a2709765f07b#slide-7", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 5, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b310-03aff0e780a5", "evidence": "Exhibit 1 process map -> Exhibit 2 modeling detail -> Exhibit 3 implication of GBM transition", "position": 2, "objective": "Drill from process big picture into modeling detail and its implication", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 78, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e4-0cf40da6752d", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Exhibit 3 GLM to GBM transition with deeper implications", "position": 3, "confidence": 85, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-abfef498e0ba", "docSlug": "9e82e22283607bcc", "documentTitle": "Work, workforce, workers Reinvented in the age of generative AI", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 16, "slideType": "diagnosis", "function": "diagnose", "notes": "The slide highlights a 'trust gap' between workers and leadership regarding the implementation of generative AI.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide explicitly compares worker and CxO perceptions across multiple metrics.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-abfef498e0ba/16", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-abfef498e0ba", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-abfef498e0ba#slide-16", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 15, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3b-f6948e4e4642", "evidence": "Figure 4 shows side-by-side 'Workers say' vs 'CxOs say' bars across Work / Workforce / Workers.", "position": 3, "objective": "Contrast worker vs CxO perceptions to expose the trust gap", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 90, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 14, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e34-7191869a68c5", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "'The trust gap' divider and Figure 4 misaligned worker/CxO perceptions", "position": 2, "confidence": 90, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 17, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e34-827a4e8d11db", "arcName": "The Transformation Tale", "arcSlug": "transformation-tale", "beatName": "Current Reality (Pain)", "beatSlug": "transformation-tale-current-reality-pain", "evidence": "Trust gap and CxO skill shortage frame the painful present", "position": 1, "confidence": 65, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true } ] }