{ "kind": "loop", "value": "35-scenario-fork", "collectionKey": "slides:loop:35-scenario-fork:all-document-kinds:all-producers:all-orientations", "filters": { "documentKinds": [], "sourceTypes": [], "orientations": [] }, "total": 220, "page": 1, "pageSize": 24, "pageCount": 10, "rows": [ { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 18, "slideType": "diagnosis", "function": "diagnose", "notes": "The slide outlines a methodology for scaling military capacities and lists the 15 specific capacities analyzed across four branches (Flyvevåbnet, Hæren, Søværnet, SO-KOM).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Introduce the up/down scaling-scenario concept across 15 capacities", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/18", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-18", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 18, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e1-f6d4e60a1a9c", "evidence": "Action title 'skaleringskoncept og skaleringer for 15 operative kapaciteter' followed by scenario overview tables.", "position": 5, "objective": "Introduce the up/down scaling-scenario concept across 15 capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 80, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 23, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-0625f7d01f7e", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "8 levers applied across operative/material-IT/cross-cutting; capacity-scaling concept.", "position": 3, "confidence": 95, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 19, "slideType": "diagnosis", "function": "diagnose", "notes": "The slide serves as a disclaimer/limitation for the scaling model presented in the deck.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Introduce the up/down scaling-scenario concept across 15 capacities", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/19", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-19", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 18, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e1-f6d4e60a1a9c", "evidence": "Action title 'skaleringskoncept og skaleringer for 15 operative kapaciteter' followed by scenario overview tables.", "position": 5, "objective": "Introduce the up/down scaling-scenario concept across 15 capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 80, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 23, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-0625f7d01f7e", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "8 levers applied across operative/material-IT/cross-cutting; capacity-scaling concept.", "position": 3, "confidence": 95, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 20, "slideType": "data_table", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The table includes a footnote regarding Hærens kapaciteter (Army capabilities) and their cost variations.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Introduce the up/down scaling-scenario concept across 15 capacities", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/20", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-20", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 18, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e1-f6d4e60a1a9c", "evidence": "Action title 'skaleringskoncept og skaleringer for 15 operative kapaciteter' followed by scenario overview tables.", "position": 5, "objective": "Introduce the up/down scaling-scenario concept across 15 capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 80, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 23, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-0625f7d01f7e", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "8 levers applied across operative/material-IT/cross-cutting; capacity-scaling concept.", "position": 3, "confidence": 95, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 21, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide is part of a BCG presentation for Struensee & Co. It uses a table to compare 7 scenarios across different military units.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Introduce the up/down scaling-scenario concept across 15 capacities", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/21", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-21", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 18, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e1-f6d4e60a1a9c", "evidence": "Action title 'skaleringskoncept og skaleringer for 15 operative kapaciteter' followed by scenario overview tables.", "position": 5, "objective": "Introduce the up/down scaling-scenario concept across 15 capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 80, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 23, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-0625f7d01f7e", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "8 levers applied across operative/material-IT/cross-cutting; capacity-scaling concept.", "position": 3, "confidence": 95, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57", "docSlug": "0531041e5c74bb5b", "documentTitle": "Climate Change: BCG’s Perspectives and Offerings", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 17, "slideType": "geographic_map", "function": "quantify_impact", "notes": "The map uses isometric icons to represent sector-specific decarbonization measures.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "compare decarbonization options and recommend tech mix", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57/17", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57#slide-17", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 17, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-c3a1b5ad3d56", "evidence": "80% path scenario → 95% path scenario → waterfall reconciling with tech wedges", "position": 4, "objective": "compare decarbonization options and recommend tech mix", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 76, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 16, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-a5fef84d7155", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "'How to decarbonize' divider; 80%/95% paths; technology waterfall", "position": 3, "confidence": 82, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 25, "from": 16, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-b4193903c853", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Paths, technologies, economic and regulatory case", "position": 2, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57", "docSlug": "0531041e5c74bb5b", "documentTitle": "Climate Change: BCG’s Perspectives and Offerings", "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": "other", "function": "present_solution", "notes": "The slide uses an isometric map of Germany as a central visual anchor to map sector-specific decarbonization strategies.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "compare decarbonization options and recommend tech mix", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57/18", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57#slide-18", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 17, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-c3a1b5ad3d56", "evidence": "80% path scenario → 95% path scenario → waterfall reconciling with tech wedges", "position": 4, "objective": "compare decarbonization options and recommend tech mix", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 76, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 16, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-a5fef84d7155", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "'How to decarbonize' divider; 80%/95% paths; technology waterfall", "position": 3, "confidence": 82, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 25, "from": 16, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-b4193903c853", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Paths, technologies, economic and regulatory case", "position": 2, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57", "docSlug": "0531041e5c74bb5b", "documentTitle": "Climate Change: BCG’s Perspectives and Offerings", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 19, "slideType": "impact_sizing", "function": "quantify_impact", "notes": "The chart uses a waterfall structure to illustrate the reduction of CO2e emissions through specific technological interventions.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "compare decarbonization options and recommend tech mix", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57/19", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57#slide-19", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 17, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-c3a1b5ad3d56", "evidence": "80% path scenario → 95% path scenario → waterfall reconciling with tech wedges", "position": 4, "objective": "compare decarbonization options and recommend tech mix", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 76, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 16, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-a5fef84d7155", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "'How to decarbonize' divider; 80%/95% paths; technology waterfall", "position": 3, "confidence": 82, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 25, "from": 16, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-b4193903c853", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Paths, technologies, economic and regulatory case", "position": 2, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-00fa38ad4e81", "docSlug": "ec7332284b546363", "documentTitle": "Conquering the next value frontier in private equity", "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": "strategic_options", "function": "compare_options", "notes": null, "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Frame two strategic paths PE firms must choose between", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-00fa38ad4e81/10", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-00fa38ad4e81", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-00fa38ad4e81#slide-10", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 10, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fd-712f-b773-820a4412635f", "evidence": "p10 explicitly: '01. Driving scale' vs '02. Tackling complexity' two-path framework.", "position": 3, "objective": "Frame two strategic paths PE firms must choose between", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 78, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 13, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-8209-dac434824d6c", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "'Moving into new territory' + 'obstacles ahead' + ranked challenges chart on p13", "position": 2, "confidence": 90, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 17, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-8209-efa5b73e7bb2", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Obstacles, lever frequency analysis, modular platform benefits", "position": 2, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-00fa38ad4e81", "docSlug": "ec7332284b546363", "documentTitle": "Conquering the next value frontier in private equity", "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": "client_example", "function": "illustrate_case", "notes": "The slide is split into two distinct sections: a left side discussing market trends in PE and a right side detailing a specific client engagement.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Frame two strategic paths PE firms must choose between", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-00fa38ad4e81/11", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-00fa38ad4e81", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-00fa38ad4e81#slide-11", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 10, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fd-712f-b773-820a4412635f", "evidence": "p10 explicitly: '01. Driving scale' vs '02. Tackling complexity' two-path framework.", "position": 3, "objective": "Frame two strategic paths PE firms must choose between", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 78, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 13, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-8209-dac434824d6c", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "'Moving into new territory' + 'obstacles ahead' + ranked challenges chart on p13", "position": 2, "confidence": 90, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 17, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-8209-efa5b73e7bb2", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Obstacles, lever frequency analysis, modular platform benefits", "position": 2, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "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": 13, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The 'Weakflation' scenario is highlighted as the 'Most likely' base case.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e/13", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e#slide-13", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 13, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d36-e01df46fc288", "evidence": "p13–16 each present 3 scenarios (Soft landing/Weakflation/Mild recession etc.) with one tagged 'Most likely'.", "position": 3, "objective": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 88, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "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-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": 14, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a table structure to compare scenarios across three dimensions: Description, Key scenario drivers and assumptions, and Corporate implications.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e/14", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e#slide-14", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 13, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d36-e01df46fc288", "evidence": "p13–16 each present 3 scenarios (Soft landing/Weakflation/Mild recession etc.) with one tagged 'Most likely'.", "position": 3, "objective": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 88, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "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-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": 15, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The 'Sluggish recovery' scenario is highlighted as the 'Most likely' outcome.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e/15", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e#slide-15", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 13, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d36-e01df46fc288", "evidence": "p13–16 each present 3 scenarios (Soft landing/Weakflation/Mild recession etc.) with one tagged 'Most likely'.", "position": 3, "objective": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 88, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "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-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": 16, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The 'Deceleration to new normal' scenario is highlighted as the 'Most likely' base case.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e/16", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e#slide-16", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 13, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d36-e01df46fc288", "evidence": "p13–16 each present 3 scenarios (Soft landing/Weakflation/Mild recession etc.) with one tagged 'Most likely'.", "position": 3, "objective": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 88, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "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-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": 17, "slideType": "regional_insights", "function": "summarize", "notes": null, "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e/17", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-32250022bc4e#slide-17", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 13, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d36-e01df46fc288", "evidence": "p13–16 each present 3 scenarios (Soft landing/Weakflation/Mild recession etc.) with one tagged 'Most likely'.", "position": 3, "objective": "Lay out per-region scenarios and identify the most-likely path", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 88, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "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-b17598fef593", "docSlug": "ba6f5e1f7c24f1ae", "documentTitle": "Port of LA Clean Truck Program", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.294, "pageNumber": 10, "slideType": "strategic_options", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a matrix structure to compare three distinct policy models (Basic, Enhanced, Enhanced with employee commitment).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Define and contrast Options I/II/III as a decision fork", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593/10", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593#slide-10", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 10, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e6-adba23b8c08f", "evidence": "Side-by-side option matrix then narrative slides on Option II rationale and Option III stretch.", "position": 4, "objective": "Define and contrast Options I/II/III as a decision fork", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 86, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87df-a07bf07db208", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Five CTP elements, interactions, labor market, three options defined.", "position": 3, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 14, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87df-b19420ca245c", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Objectives, framework, options compared on benefits/risks.", "position": 2, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593", "docSlug": "ba6f5e1f7c24f1ae", "documentTitle": "Port of LA Clean Truck Program", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.294, "pageNumber": 11, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": null, "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Define and contrast Options I/II/III as a decision fork", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593/11", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593#slide-11", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 10, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e6-adba23b8c08f", "evidence": "Side-by-side option matrix then narrative slides on Option II rationale and Option III stretch.", "position": 4, "objective": "Define and contrast Options I/II/III as a decision fork", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 86, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87df-a07bf07db208", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Five CTP elements, interactions, labor market, three options defined.", "position": 3, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 14, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87df-b19420ca245c", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Objectives, framework, options compared on benefits/risks.", "position": 2, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593", "docSlug": "ba6f5e1f7c24f1ae", "documentTitle": "Port of LA Clean Truck Program", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.294, "pageNumber": 12, "slideType": "strategic_options", "function": "present_solution", "notes": null, "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Define and contrast Options I/II/III as a decision fork", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593/12", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b17598fef593#slide-12", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 10, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e6-adba23b8c08f", "evidence": "Side-by-side option matrix then narrative slides on Option II rationale and Option III stretch.", "position": 4, "objective": "Define and contrast Options I/II/III as a decision fork", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 86, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87df-a07bf07db208", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Five CTP elements, interactions, labor market, three options defined.", "position": 3, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 14, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87df-b19420ca245c", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Objectives, framework, options compared on benefits/risks.", "position": 2, "confidence": 55, "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": 12, "slideType": "segmentation", "function": "present_framework", "notes": "The slide uses a Venn diagram to show the convergence of two AI domains.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Choose model build path and timing", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79/12", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79#slide-12", "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": 13, "slideType": "strategic_options", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a decision tree structure to categorize strategic paths for LLM implementation.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Choose model build path and timing", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79/13", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79#slide-13", "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": 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": "Choose model build path and timing", "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": 15, "slideType": "strategic_options", "function": "present_solution", "notes": "Includes a footnote referencing Sequoia Capital. The chart is an illustrative adoption curve.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Choose model build path and timing", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79/15", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-85dd78267d79#slide-15", "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-b4f6703d5f80", "docSlug": "b87718276d2e8ef8", "documentTitle": "US Mail Volumes to 2020", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.294, "pageNumber": 19, "slideType": "data_table", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide uses a dark green background typical of BCG decks. It includes a specific callout for the -44% change in First-Class Mail revenue.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Test robustness of decline through revenue gap and scenarios", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80/19", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80#slide-19", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 19, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-8fc7077006e7", "evidence": "p20 'All reasonable scenarios suggest volume will continue to decline'; p21 lists external/USPS events", "position": 4, "objective": "Test robustness of decline through revenue gap and scenarios", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 75, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 15, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-6d59c738dacb", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Peer post benchmarks, broadband regression, revenue gap, scenarios", "position": 3, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 21, "from": 18, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-7d013d49ef95", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Implications section: revenue gap, scenarios, external events", "position": 2, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80", "docSlug": "b87718276d2e8ef8", "documentTitle": "US Mail Volumes to 2020", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.294, "pageNumber": 20, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The matrix uses a 3x3 grid to show volume outcomes. Callouts provide context for the extreme scenarios (top-right and bottom-left).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Test robustness of decline through revenue gap and scenarios", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80/20", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80#slide-20", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 19, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-8fc7077006e7", "evidence": "p20 'All reasonable scenarios suggest volume will continue to decline'; p21 lists external/USPS events", "position": 4, "objective": "Test robustness of decline through revenue gap and scenarios", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 75, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 15, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-6d59c738dacb", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Peer post benchmarks, broadband regression, revenue gap, scenarios", "position": 3, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 21, "from": 18, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-7d013d49ef95", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Implications section: revenue gap, scenarios, external events", "position": 2, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80", "docSlug": "b87718276d2e8ef8", "documentTitle": "US Mail Volumes to 2020", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.294, "pageNumber": 21, "slideType": "risk_register", "function": "diagnose", "notes": "Uses a simple binary classification (positive/negative) for various risk/opportunity factors.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Test robustness of decline through revenue gap and scenarios", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80/21", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80#slide-21", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 19, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-8fc7077006e7", "evidence": "p20 'All reasonable scenarios suggest volume will continue to decline'; p21 lists external/USPS events", "position": 4, "objective": "Test robustness of decline through revenue gap and scenarios", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 75, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 15, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-6d59c738dacb", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Peer post benchmarks, broadband regression, revenue gap, scenarios", "position": 3, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 21, "from": 18, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-7d013d49ef95", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Implications section: revenue gap, scenarios, external events", "position": 2, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true } ] }