{ "kind": "framework", "value": "peer-benchmark", "collectionKey": "slides:framework:peer-benchmark:all-document-kinds:all-producers:all-orientations", "filters": { "documentKinds": [], "sourceTypes": [], "orientations": [] }, "total": 467, "page": 1, "pageSize": 24, "pageCount": 20, "rows": [ { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-61bacb2712d3", "docSlug": "0b9e49eefd662629", "documentTitle": "AI at Work APAC", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.91, "pageNumber": 6, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart highlights the top three countries (India, Indonesia, China) with a darker shade of green.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of AI adoption rates across multiple countries.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-61bacb2712d3/6", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-61bacb2712d3", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-61bacb2712d3#slide-6", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 6, "from": 3, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e1-25a95530aaba", "evidence": "5 takeaways → 78% adoption → frontline adoption → market-level adoption all converge on 'APAC leads'.", "position": 1, "objective": "Establish strong APAC AI adoption via stacked evidence", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 82, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 18, "from": 4, "beatId": "019dd95a-0701-77fe-ae98-cd3a1b9da151", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Adoption stats, optimism breakdowns, fears, leadership gap, agents, shadow AI", "position": 4, "confidence": 82, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 10, "from": 1, "beatId": "019dd95a-0701-77fe-ae98-d5af458d2b49", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Survey + adoption + optimism + use cases + productivity data", "position": 1, "confidence": 78, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "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": 292, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a data table for itemized consumption and a bar chart for peer benchmarking.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of Defense spending against other public institutions", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc/292", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc#slide-292", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 321, "from": 229, "name": "Mece Breakdown", "slug": "40-mece-breakdown", "bestFor": "Problem structuring, ensuring completeness, strategic analysis", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-6a47af522484", "evidence": "538 mio. addresserbar -> 6 delanalyser -> centralisation, in-sourcing, VTC, hotel, kontorartikler, TV, SIM, kursus.", "position": 10, "objective": "MECE breakdown of Ovrig Drift baseline into six delanalyser plus sub-initiatives", "structure": "The Whole -> Category A (distinct) -> Category B (distinct) -> Category C (distinct) -> Complete Coverage", "confidence": 80, "description": "Divide a complex topic into mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive categories" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 321, "from": 19, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-2412ddc609c1", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Twelve effektiviseringsforslag with IPT, kategoristyring, IT, organisation, indkøb.", "position": 3, "confidence": 92, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 365, "from": 166, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-37e90642ab06", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Potentialeestimater, benchmark gaps, comparison tables.", "position": 2, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "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": 90, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "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 next best, but 24% higher OPEX compared to the absolute best.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of 19 European electricity distribution companies on cost metrics.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180/90", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180#slide-90", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "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": 91, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "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 average.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of operational costs per customer across 15 international gas distribution companies.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180/91", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180#slide-91", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-33c48caa8f63", "docSlug": "02d4579ded506817", "documentTitle": "HFS Top 10 Healthcare Provider", "authorId": "Cognizant", "authorName": "HFS", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 41, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The table displays company logos ranked 1-10 across 13 different performance categories.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Ranking table comparing multiple service providers across standardized criteria.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-33c48caa8f63/41", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-33c48caa8f63", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-33c48caa8f63#slide-41", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-272f25908551", "docSlug": "779b6b192abf180f", "documentTitle": "Industrial Speedsters How advanced technologies can turbocharge your speed to market", "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": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide defines three segments based on speed-to-market criteria (I2P, P2P, D2D).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of performance metrics across three defined segments of companies.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-272f25908551/10", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-272f25908551", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-272f25908551#slide-10", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 8, "name": "Aha Moment", "slug": "03-aha-moment", "bestFor": "Data-heavy sections, research findings, analytical arguments", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fd-712f-b775-70cb3ecbd47a", "evidence": "p.8 frames 'Is there a direct link?'; pp.9-11 deliver three pieces of evidence (tech leverage, growth, profitability)", "position": 2, "objective": "Pose the speed-tech-performance question then reveal the speedster advantage across three dimensions", "structure": "The Problem/Question -> What the Data Shows -> The Insight", "confidence": 85, "description": "Establish a tension, present data, then deliver the insight that changes everything" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820c-6ea328bbe0be", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Speedster topline growth 7.9% and operating margin 13.8% advantages", "position": 4, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 11, "from": 8, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820c-79fb6806df3a", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Question and three advantages tying speed to tech to performance", "position": 2, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-2a4c3fe346c9", "docSlug": "f355bb3ba498875b", "documentTitle": "International Comparison of Australia’s Freight and Supply Chain Performance 2019", "authorId": "LEK", "authorName": "L.E.K.", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 72, "slideType": "data_table", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a heatmap to show relative performance against Australia, where orange indicates disadvantaged and green indicates advantaged.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of waste supply chain metrics across different geographic regions.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-2a4c3fe346c9/72", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-2a4c3fe346c9", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-2a4c3fe346c9#slide-72", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-093f3fd1ecfe", "docSlug": "5ee5a9db2750184a", "documentTitle": "Lebanon Economic Vision", "authorId": "McKinsey", "authorName": "McKinsey", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.333, "pageNumber": 284, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a background gradient to categorize the ratio of agriculture credit to GDP.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of Lebanon against other countries on a scatter plot", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-093f3fd1ecfe/284", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-093f3fd1ecfe", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-093f3fd1ecfe#slide-284", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-093f3fd1ecfe", "docSlug": "5ee5a9db2750184a", "documentTitle": "Lebanon Economic Vision", "authorId": "McKinsey", "authorName": "McKinsey", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.333, "pageNumber": 309, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a custom dot plot/dumbbell hybrid to show rank positions and changes over time.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of Lebanon against peer countries across specific business criteria.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-093f3fd1ecfe/309", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-093f3fd1ecfe", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-093f3fd1ecfe#slide-309", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 83, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide includes a specific callout for Dallas (DAS Only) and a legend distinguishing benchmark vs non-benchmark cities.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of Dallas against other cities on LRR and intake metrics", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/83", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-83", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 91, "from": 78, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-4cbc2d0be8fb", "evidence": "ASO staffing vs peers, intake per ASO, budget exhibits", "position": 15, "objective": "Diagnose DAS operations against peer benchmarks", "structure": "Our Performance -> Industry Average -> Best-in-Class -> The Gap = The Opportunity", "confidence": 76, "description": "Compare performance against best-in-class to quantify the opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 142, "from": 45, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87dd-9f808a4e90ee", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Deep-dive recommendations, full report exhibits, peer benchmarks, S/N math", "position": 4, "confidence": 92, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 170, "slideType": "impact_sizing", "function": "quantify_impact", "notes": "The slide uses a peer benchmark to justify a performance gap and calculates the incremental impact based on closing that gap.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of DAS intake against other cities", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/170", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-170", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 267, "from": 161, "name": "Build Up", "slug": "33-build-up", "bestFor": "Pricing justification, cost estimation, market sizing", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-5934a57a4387", "evidence": "Repeated triplet pattern: e.g., p.166/167/168, p.178/179/180, p.188/189", "position": 18, "objective": "For each initiative, build up Overview → Estimated Impact → Resource Requirements", "structure": "The Base -> Add Component A -> Add Component B -> Add Component C -> The Total", "confidence": 82, "description": "Start from zero and add components to arrive at a total" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 256, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a mean line that excludes Dallas. It highlights a -24% variance for FY 13-14 and a +10% variance for the tentative FY 16-17 budget.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of municipal spending per capita across multiple cities.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/256", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-256", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 267, "from": 161, "name": "Build Up", "slug": "33-build-up", "bestFor": "Pricing justification, cost estimation, market sizing", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-5934a57a4387", "evidence": "Repeated triplet pattern: e.g., p.166/167/168, p.178/179/180, p.188/189", "position": 18, "objective": "For each initiative, build up Overview → Estimated Impact → Resource Requirements", "structure": "The Base -> Add Component A -> Add Component B -> Add Component C -> The Total", "confidence": 82, "description": "Start from zero and add components to arrive at a total" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 319, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses bar charts to contrast staffing density and operational efficiency (intake) against a peer benchmark mean.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of DAS metrics against a set of peer cities.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/319", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-319", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 358, "from": 311, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-64284a59ff04", "evidence": "Section '3 DAS Operations'; intake, kennels, costs, LRR breakdown", "position": 21, "objective": "Detailed zoom on DAS shelter operations, length-of-stay, costs, outcomes", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 76, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 345, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "Includes a Pareto-style cumulative distribution chart for DAS and a bar chart for peer benchmarking.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of DAS pricing against SPCA, Rockwall Pets, and Operation Kindness.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/345", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-345", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 358, "from": 311, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-64284a59ff04", "evidence": "Section '3 DAS Operations'; intake, kennels, costs, LRR breakdown", "position": 21, "objective": "Detailed zoom on DAS shelter operations, length-of-stay, costs, outcomes", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 76, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 361, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a mean line that excludes Dallas to provide a clean benchmark comparison.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of municipal spending across multiple cities", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/361", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-361", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 378, "from": 359, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-6b6450df5662", "evidence": "Benchmark sub-deck: San Antonio 90% LRR, NKLA, Austin 96%, Jacksonville 90%", "position": 22, "objective": "Profile peer cities (San Antonio, LA, Austin, etc.) to set targets", "structure": "Our Performance -> Industry Average -> Best-in-Class -> The Gap = The Opportunity", "confidence": 86, "description": "Compare performance against best-in-class to quantify the opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "docSlug": "f6506cba246b6e5e", "documentTitle": "New Mexico State Staffing Study", "authorId": "Deloitte", "authorName": "Deloitte", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.333, "pageNumber": 23, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a series of stacked bar charts with diamond markers to indicate NMSU's position relative to peer benchmarks.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of NMSU HR metrics against peer group averages", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c/23", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c#slide-23", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 30, "from": 23, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "44b1713e-1e4f-4cf4-af96-ed481aad08e1", "evidence": "The document provides a detailed analysis of the HR function, including labor costs, span of control, and management layers.", "position": 0, "objective": "To understand the current state of HR function and identify opportunities for improvement", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 0.7, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 60, "from": 16, "beatId": "03b5dfe0-8cd3-4bbf-9ad1-24c6ddcb0f98", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "The document presents data and analysis on various aspects of NMSU's staffing structure and processes, including labor costs, span of control, and management layers.", "position": 2, "confidence": 0.8, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "docSlug": "f6506cba246b6e5e", "documentTitle": "New Mexico State Staffing Study", "authorId": "Deloitte", "authorName": "Deloitte", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.333, "pageNumber": 35, "slideType": "diagnosis", "function": "diagnose", "notes": "The slide uses a diamond icon to represent NMSU's position relative to peer benchmarks (represented by the bars).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of NMSU metrics against peer group averages", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c/35", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c#slide-35", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 44, "from": 35, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "5538c482-8bc4-4b3d-b292-9cf9d9e1368e", "evidence": "The document provides a detailed analysis of the Procurement function, including labor costs, span of control, and management layers.", "position": 1, "objective": "To understand the current state of Procurement function and identify opportunities for improvement", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 0.7, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 60, "from": 16, "beatId": "03b5dfe0-8cd3-4bbf-9ad1-24c6ddcb0f98", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "The document presents data and analysis on various aspects of NMSU's staffing structure and processes, including labor costs, span of control, and management layers.", "position": 2, "confidence": 0.8, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "docSlug": "f6506cba246b6e5e", "documentTitle": "New Mexico State Staffing Study", "authorId": "Deloitte", "authorName": "Deloitte", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.333, "pageNumber": 92, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a diamond icon to represent NMSU's position relative to peer benchmarks.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of internal metrics against peer group averages", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c/92", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c#slide-92", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 194, "from": 61, "beatId": "b91c1d77-e314-4263-ba4c-94eb382a49fc", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Impact & Next Steps", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-impact-next-steps", "evidence": "The document outlines key opportunities for improvement and potential cost savings, as well as recommendations for implementation.", "position": 3, "confidence": 0.8, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "docSlug": "f6506cba246b6e5e", "documentTitle": "New Mexico State Staffing Study", "authorId": "Deloitte", "authorName": "Deloitte", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.333, "pageNumber": 116, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a stacked bar chart format to represent maturity levels (None, Low, Medium, High) for centralization and shared services.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of CUR metrics against peer institutions", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c/116", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c#slide-116", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 194, "from": 61, "beatId": "b91c1d77-e314-4263-ba4c-94eb382a49fc", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Impact & Next Steps", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-impact-next-steps", "evidence": "The document outlines key opportunities for improvement and potential cost savings, as well as recommendations for implementation.", "position": 3, "confidence": 0.8, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "docSlug": "f6506cba246b6e5e", "documentTitle": "New Mexico State Staffing Study", "authorId": "Deloitte", "authorName": "Deloitte", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.333, "pageNumber": 138, "slideType": "diagnosis", "function": "diagnose", "notes": "The slide uses a custom bar-chart-based benchmarking framework to compare NMSU (diamond) against peer ranges (colored bars).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of NMSU against peer ranges across multiple operational dimensions.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c/138", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-c2f73497811c#slide-138", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 194, "from": 61, "beatId": "b91c1d77-e314-4263-ba4c-94eb382a49fc", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Impact & Next Steps", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-impact-next-steps", "evidence": "The document outlines key opportunities for improvement and potential cost savings, as well as recommendations for implementation.", "position": 3, "confidence": 0.8, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d8401c229706", "docSlug": "a72f1e75b0e7b746", "documentTitle": "Next Generation Manufacturing Tech Innovation", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.545, "pageNumber": 11, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a combination of bar charts, icon-based charts, and pictograms to compare India with Mexico, Germany, China, South Korea, and the USA.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of India against multiple countries across three key metrics.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d8401c229706/11", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d8401c229706", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d8401c229706#slide-11", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 16, "from": 10, "name": "Aha Moment", "slug": "03-aha-moment", "bestFor": "Data-heavy sections, research findings, analytical arguments", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e6-1c4bd7118b99", "evidence": "Long-term performance data -> recent slowdown data -> Make-in-India response insight", "position": 1, "objective": "Frame the state of Indian manufacturing - strong long-term but recent slump", "structure": "The Problem/Question -> What the Data Shows -> The Insight", "confidence": 75, "description": "Establish a tension, present data, then deliver the insight that changes everything" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87de-90b686043a26", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Situation & Context", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-situation-context", "evidence": "'At a Glance' + 'STATE OF THE SECTOR' framing Indian manufacturing today", "position": 1, "confidence": 90, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" }, { "to": 28, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87de-a79e34774a89", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Sector state + superstar benchmarks establish facts", "position": 1, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-bc8e3e952c51", "docSlug": "bc9c22881d997435", "documentTitle": "Reshaping NYCHA support functions", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.401, "pageNumber": 20, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a box-plot style visualization to show 25th, median, and 75th percentiles for HR FTE ratios across industries.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of internal metrics against industry standards", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-bc8e3e952c51/20", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-bc8e3e952c51", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-bc8e3e952c51#slide-20", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 17, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e6-f2d69ce24c40", "evidence": "Tenant-interview process diagnostic, systems example, org redesign, HR sizing, HR maturity ladder.", "position": 3, "objective": "Illustrate each opportunity type with a worked example", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 80, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 23, "from": 14, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87df-e587ebad39a3", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Lenses to identify opps; '$16B challenges, mutually reinforcing' on p23.", "position": 2, "confidence": 95, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" } ], "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": 13, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart compares revenue per employee ($845k vs $781k) to demonstrate the productivity advantage of disability inclusion leaders.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of performance metrics between leaders and industry peers", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88/13", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88#slide-13", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 11, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3a-71aad0d724c7", "evidence": "Revenue/net income/economic profit gains, productivity edge, half-trillion market, Microsoft case, 5x Glassdoor mentions, 4x positive reviews.", "position": 3, "objective": "Stack multiple proof points that leaders outperform", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 82, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e32-ae0a4b976654", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Business case + culture challenge (76% don't disclose) — the gap and why it persists", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "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-b635-48524f17a13a", "docSlug": "06b87cf0bd47b1da", "documentTitle": "Winning on the Margins TeBIT 2023", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.91, "pageNumber": 11, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a grouped bar chart format to compare averages against top-tier benchmarks.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of average performance vs top performers", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-48524f17a13a/11", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-48524f17a13a", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-48524f17a13a#slide-11", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 10, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b310-3a217ca6b337", "evidence": "Both slides juxtapose KPI averages against highlighted top-performer circles.", "position": 3, "objective": "Show top-performer gap on digitization KPIs", "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": 13, "from": 4, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e4-699541cb8c95", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "TeBIT benchmarks across energy, digitization, and process KPIs.", "position": 4, "confidence": 78, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 13, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e4-7698fb3f6f97", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "15-45% top-performer gap and call-center regression quantified.", "position": 2, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true } ] }