{ "kind": "tool", "value": "layering-and-separation", "collectionKey": "slides:tool:layering-and-separation:all-document-kinds:all-producers:all-orientations", "filters": { "documentKinds": [], "sourceTypes": [], "orientations": [] }, "total": 71, "page": 1, "pageSize": 24, "pageCount": 3, "rows": [ { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-d65acfc8060e", "docSlug": "5acc72be81397b34", "documentTitle": "EY Academic Resource Center – mission", "authorId": "EY", "authorName": "EY", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.779, "pageNumber": 43, "slideType": "other", "function": "present_framework", "notes": "The diagram uses a concentric sphere metaphor to represent data depth.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 2, "evidence": "Concentric layers separate four data tiers · Concentric sphere diagram showing data layers", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-d65acfc8060e/43", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-d65acfc8060e", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-d65acfc8060e#slide-43", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 44, "from": 42, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019de8b3-2b18-72ea-a7b1-852c3401b4a3", "evidence": "Layered-sphere analyzer diagram from trial balance to transactions", "position": 5, "objective": "Introduce EY Helix product layers", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 65, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 59, "from": 31, "beatId": "019de8b3-29ae-71c9-89c0-7849ed6739d4", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Case study showcase + Peach State deep-dive walkthrough", "position": 4, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 70, "from": 31, "beatId": "019de8b3-2a62-76a8-a3fa-f1d2eebde7cc", "arcName": "The Golden Circle", "arcSlug": "golden-circle", "beatName": "What", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Cases, Helix tool, website, contact", "position": 3, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9341c5941216", "docSlug": "5415c04bdc8a86e3", "documentTitle": "Agile Innovation Brief", "authorId": "Bain", "authorName": "Bain", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 6, "slideType": "case_study", "function": "illustrate_case", "notes": "The slide contains a narrative history of Agile development and a specific application example at NPR.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Red-bordered callout box visually separates origin story from main flow.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9341c5941216/6", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9341c5941216", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9341c5941216#slide-6", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 5, "name": "Before After", "slug": "21-before-after", "bestFor": "Product demos, process improvements, ROI justification", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b310-e95dca284b8c", "evidence": "Mission Bell '75% compression' + Waterfall description + Waterfall-vs-Agile comparison table on p.7.", "position": 2, "objective": "Contrast Waterfall pain with Agile glory and quantify the delta", "structure": "The Old Way (Pain) -> The Moment of Change -> The New Way (Glory) -> The Measurable Delta", "confidence": 85, "description": "Show the dramatic contrast between the old way and the new way through side-by-side comparison" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 6, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e5-69a1bf5200af", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Waterfall described as predictive, slow, documentation-heavy; 'birth of Agile' history box.", "position": 2, "confidence": 85, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 6, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e5-7b215f8f2e61", "arcName": "The Transformation Tale", "arcSlug": "transformation-tale", "beatName": "Current Reality (Pain)", "beatSlug": "transformation-tale-current-reality-pain", "evidence": "Waterfall depicted as slow, predictive, late-delivery method.", "position": 1, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9341c5941216", "docSlug": "5415c04bdc8a86e3", "documentTitle": "Agile Innovation Brief", "authorId": "Bain", "authorName": "Bain", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 10, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide contrasts Agile vs. Traditional across six dimensions: Market environment, Customer involvement, Innovation type, Modularity of work, Impact of interim mistakes, and Corporate culture.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Dark category labels on left, white-space-separated cells for each side.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9341c5941216/10", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9341c5941216", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9341c5941216#slide-10", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 10, "from": 10, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b310-f14bc60149f1", "evidence": "Table 'Conditions favorable to Agile vs. traditional methods' with two opposing columns across six dimensions.", "position": 4, "objective": "Contrast Agile-friendly vs traditional-friendly conditions", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 90, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 10, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e5-6eceeb01a2fb", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Waterfall vs Agile table, three impediments, conditions-favorable framework.", "position": 3, "confidence": 85, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 14, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e5-8136de322fe4", "arcName": "The Transformation Tale", "arcSlug": "transformation-tale", "beatName": "The Bridge", "beatSlug": "transformation-tale-the-bridge", "evidence": "When-Agile-works conditions, 5 pillars, value-bridge math from concurrent to focused.", "position": 3, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c1a0e4d06805", "docSlug": "c5bc9b6200156455", "documentTitle": "e-Conomy SEA 2023 report: Singapore", "authorId": "Bain", "authorName": "Google", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.777, "pageNumber": 6, "slideType": "data_table", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The chart uses a vertical dashed line to separate full-year data (2019-2022) from half-year data (H1 2022-H1 2023).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Stacked bars layer six funding categories (Nascent, Travel, Transport & food, Digital media, E-commerce, DFS).", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c1a0e4d06805/6", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c1a0e4d06805", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c1a0e4d06805#slide-6", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 6, "from": 5, "name": "Aha Moment", "slug": "03-aha-moment", "bestFor": "Data-heavy sections, research findings, analytical arguments", "matchId": "019dd95a-08f7-737a-a001-dac784b2be5b", "evidence": "p.5 builds to the 8.4X reveal, p.6 contextualises with funding trajectory; data-driven insight pages.", "position": 2, "objective": "Surface the standout consumer insight (HVU multiplier) and its capital-markets implication (funding decline)", "structure": "The Problem/Question -> What the Data Shows -> The Insight", "confidence": 55, "description": "Establish a tension, present data, then deliver the insight that changes everything" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 6, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-07a6-74c7-9026-c198b30f7bc9", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Implications", "beatSlug": "onion-implications", "evidence": "Private funding declining to $2.8B in H1 2023 — what the data means for capital.", "position": 5, "confidence": 65, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c6d8f954507b", "docSlug": "952e48cb8fb044c2", "documentTitle": "e-Conomy SEA 2023 report: Thailand", "authorId": "Bain", "authorName": "Google", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.777, "pageNumber": 7, "slideType": "data_table", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The chart distinguishes between annual data (2019-2022) and half-year data (H1 2022, H2 2022, H1 2023).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Vertical dotted line separates annual and half-yearly views", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c6d8f954507b/7", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c6d8f954507b", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c6d8f954507b#slide-7", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 3, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-08f7-737a-a001-efae2809e86a", "evidence": "Five chart slides (market size, geo, DFS, HVU, funding) each present an evidence shard, no synthesis slide but cumulative pattern.", "position": 1, "objective": "Stack multiple evidence slides to build the pattern that Thailand has tailwinds with concentrated value pools", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 55, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-07a6-74c7-9026-ea05ae51a95d", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Implications", "beatSlug": "onion-implications", "evidence": "p7 private funding levels — capital context wraps the diagnosis", "position": 5, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c6d8f954507b", "docSlug": "952e48cb8fb044c2", "documentTitle": "e-Conomy SEA 2023 report: Thailand", "authorId": "Bain", "authorName": "Google", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.777, "pageNumber": 14, "slideType": "financial_analysis", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide shows a significant spike in H2 2022 followed by a return to lower levels in H1 2023.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Dotted line separates annual and half-year views", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c6d8f954507b/14", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c6d8f954507b", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-c6d8f954507b#slide-14", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 14, "from": 10, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-08f7-737a-a001-f1d54fb3e53c", "evidence": "p10-14 are 1:1 Thai translations of p3-7 with identical chart sequence.", "position": 2, "objective": "Thai-language mirror of the same evidence stack", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 55, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-dc33bed363eb", "docSlug": "42b983acd15c7ada", "documentTitle": "Elevating the Exchange", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 12, "slideType": "other", "function": "present_framework", "notes": "The slide uses a layered architecture diagram to show how digital foundations support digital platforms across the trade lifecycle.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Visual layers: Digital Platforms on top, Foundations stacked below", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-dc33bed363eb/12", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-dc33bed363eb", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-dc33bed363eb#slide-12", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 14, "from": 11, "name": "Maturity Curve", "slug": "36-maturity-curve", "bestFor": "Digital transformation, capability building, benchmarking", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fd-712f-b773-d3281fba9dde", "evidence": "p.11 sets need for digital core, p.12 'Fabulous core' layered framework, p.13 case migration, p.14 investment-priority survey vs current state.", "position": 2, "objective": "Define the digital-core capabilities exchanges must build to be reinvention-ready", "structure": "Current Maturity Level -> The Gap to Next Level -> Required Capabilities -> The Roadmap", "confidence": 78, "description": "Show where you are on a progression and what it takes to reach the next level" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 22, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820a-5fa4131fdf65", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Four numbered 'Steps' with digital-core framework and tech enablers", "position": 3, "confidence": 90, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 31, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820a-7161d37dbb94", "arcName": "The Transformation Tale", "arcSlug": "transformation-tale", "beatName": "The Bridge", "beatSlug": "transformation-tale-the-bridge", "evidence": "Four-step reinvention path with proof points", "position": 3, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-4c835981e4e6", "docSlug": "e58b57d6c34ef38c", "documentTitle": "GEM Outlook 2021-2025 Hong Kong", "authorId": "PwC", "authorName": "PwC", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 19, "slideType": "industry_trends", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide combines a combo chart for Hong Kong OTT revenue/growth and a pie chart for global OTT revenue distribution.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Dual-axis bars+line separate revenue from YoY growth.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-4c835981e4e6/19", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-4c835981e4e6", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-4c835981e4e6#slide-19", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 23, "from": 19, "name": "Before After", "slug": "21-before-after", "bestFor": "Product demos, process improvements, ROI justification", "matchId": "019de993-ec85-72fb-a973-37dc58c22c49", "evidence": "p.21 shows OTT crossing traditional TV in 2024; p.19-23 trace pre/post-lockdown revenue shift.", "position": 4, "objective": "Show OTT displacing traditional TV in HK (old way to moment of change to new way)", "structure": "The Old Way (Pain) -> The Moment of Change -> The New Way (Glory) -> The Measurable Delta", "confidence": 78, "description": "Show the dramatic contrast between the old way and the new way through side-by-side comparison" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 12, "beatId": "019de993-eb16-7436-9f69-ee706774288d", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Section 02 deep dives interpret what trends mean for ads, OTT, games.", "position": 2, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 14, "beatId": "019de993-ebde-706a-b884-b70bf330c102", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Core Insight", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Sub-segment deep dives reveal digital/OTT/games positioning.", "position": 4, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-4c835981e4e6", "docSlug": "e58b57d6c34ef38c", "documentTitle": "GEM Outlook 2021-2025 Hong Kong", "authorId": "PwC", "authorName": "PwC", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 25, "slideType": "market_sizing", "function": "size_opportunity", "notes": "The slide uses a dual-axis chart for the Hong Kong market and a pie chart for global market share.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Dual-axis revenue+YoY growth chart.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-4c835981e4e6/25", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-4c835981e4e6", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-4c835981e4e6#slide-25", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 25, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019de993-eca7-72e3-930e-6b6367b3e831", "evidence": "p.26 ranks HK 4th globally on per-capita; p.28 contrasts HK vs Singapore distribution; p.29 closes with strategic shifts.", "position": 5, "objective": "Position HK video games against global benchmarks and Singapore", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 74, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 12, "beatId": "019de993-eb16-7436-9f69-ee706774288d", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Section 02 deep dives interpret what trends mean for ads, OTT, games.", "position": 2, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 14, "beatId": "019de993-ebde-706a-b884-b70bf330c102", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Core Insight", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Sub-segment deep dives reveal digital/OTT/games positioning.", "position": 4, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a165-114b2d066660", "docSlug": "3c2cef39adae97a3", "documentTitle": "High-end Tourism – a strong driver for Europe", "authorId": "misc", "authorName": "Bain", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 11, "slideType": "diagnosis", "function": "present_framework", "notes": "The slide uses a layered arc diagram to show how direct impacts lead to broader hard and soft spillovers.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "diagram/other: Layered arc diagram showing value creation axes", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a165-114b2d066660/11", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a165-114b2d066660", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a165-114b2d066660#slide-11", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-1c75f5a44c02", "docSlug": "ee43cd765b3d02ea", "documentTitle": "How will COVID-19 change the consumer?", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 6, "slideType": "industry_trends", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The chart displays net purchase impact by COVID-19, with segments for postponed, brand new, used/refurbished, and unknown status.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Net-impact %s float above each stack as a separate layer.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-1c75f5a44c02/6", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-1c75f5a44c02", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-1c75f5a44c02#slide-6", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 6, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fd-712f-b775-042c54822650", "evidence": "Net-purchase stacked bars (p6) + 34% headline (p7) reinforce same pattern.", "position": 3, "objective": "Show used/refurbished is now a widespread habit", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 75, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 1, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820b-c59d9ed8299b", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Cover/context plus 9 data slides on ecommerce, used devices, and tech usage.", "position": 1, "confidence": 78, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" }, { "to": 12, "from": 4, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820b-df00f592beff", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Nine data slides on ecommerce, refurb, importance shifts, sustained usage.", "position": 4, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "docSlug": "190510b49511442d", "documentTitle": "Lazard LCOE+", "authorId": "RolandBerger", "authorName": "Lazard", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 9, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a bar-style visualization to show cost ranges for different energy sources, with specific annotations for conventional energy sources.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Solid bars for renewable, dashed-outline for conventional", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04/9", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04#slide-9", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 9, "name": "Sensitivity Test", "slug": "52-sensitivity-test", "bestFor": "Financial models, forecasting, risk assessment", "matchId": "019de8e9-bb13-71cb-9670-75a55146cdcb", "evidence": "Base-case comparison (p.9) followed by sensitivity to subsidies, fuel, carbon, capital (p.10-13), then firming/competitive comparisons (p.14-15).", "position": 2, "objective": "Stress-test LCOE robustness across multiple parameters", "structure": "The Base Case -> Assumption A Varies -> Assumption B Varies -> Robustness of Conclusion", "confidence": 70, "description": "Show how conclusions change (or don't) when key assumptions vary" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 9, "beatId": "019de8e9-b9e8-7495-9d03-f088e78d95b4", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE/LCOS/LCOH benchmarking, sensitivity, cost-component charts", "position": 1, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 7, "beatId": "019de8e9-ba8d-77ee-ae2c-b5633a8eaa8c", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Deeper Layer", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE, LCOS, LCOH detailed comparisons and sensitivities", "position": 3, "confidence": 35, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "docSlug": "190510b49511442d", "documentTitle": "Lazard LCOE+", "authorId": "RolandBerger", "authorName": "Lazard", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 10, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The chart uses a bar-stacked-like approach to show the range of LCOE values based on different subsidy scenarios.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Three-tiered bar (LCOE, sub. excl., sub. incl. EC)", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04/10", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04#slide-10", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 9, "name": "Sensitivity Test", "slug": "52-sensitivity-test", "bestFor": "Financial models, forecasting, risk assessment", "matchId": "019de8e9-bb13-71cb-9670-75a55146cdcb", "evidence": "Base-case comparison (p.9) followed by sensitivity to subsidies, fuel, carbon, capital (p.10-13), then firming/competitive comparisons (p.14-15).", "position": 2, "objective": "Stress-test LCOE robustness across multiple parameters", "structure": "The Base Case -> Assumption A Varies -> Assumption B Varies -> Robustness of Conclusion", "confidence": 70, "description": "Show how conclusions change (or don't) when key assumptions vary" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 9, "beatId": "019de8e9-b9e8-7495-9d03-f088e78d95b4", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE/LCOS/LCOH benchmarking, sensitivity, cost-component charts", "position": 1, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 7, "beatId": "019de8e9-ba8d-77ee-ae2c-b5633a8eaa8c", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Deeper Layer", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE, LCOS, LCOH detailed comparisons and sensitivities", "position": 3, "confidence": 35, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "docSlug": "190510b49511442d", "documentTitle": "Lazard LCOE+", "authorId": "RolandBerger", "authorName": "Lazard", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 11, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The chart uses a bar-chart format to represent cost ranges for different energy sources, distinguishing between renewable and conventional energy.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Solid bars for base, shaded boxes for sensitivity range", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04/11", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04#slide-11", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 9, "name": "Sensitivity Test", "slug": "52-sensitivity-test", "bestFor": "Financial models, forecasting, risk assessment", "matchId": "019de8e9-bb13-71cb-9670-75a55146cdcb", "evidence": "Base-case comparison (p.9) followed by sensitivity to subsidies, fuel, carbon, capital (p.10-13), then firming/competitive comparisons (p.14-15).", "position": 2, "objective": "Stress-test LCOE robustness across multiple parameters", "structure": "The Base Case -> Assumption A Varies -> Assumption B Varies -> Robustness of Conclusion", "confidence": 70, "description": "Show how conclusions change (or don't) when key assumptions vary" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 9, "beatId": "019de8e9-b9e8-7495-9d03-f088e78d95b4", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE/LCOS/LCOH benchmarking, sensitivity, cost-component charts", "position": 1, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 7, "beatId": "019de8e9-ba8d-77ee-ae2c-b5633a8eaa8c", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Deeper Layer", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE, LCOS, LCOH detailed comparisons and sensitivities", "position": 3, "confidence": 35, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "docSlug": "190510b49511442d", "documentTitle": "Lazard LCOE+", "authorId": "RolandBerger", "authorName": "Lazard", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 15, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a stacked bar approach to show base LCOE, subsidies, and firming costs, with a data table below for ELCC, Capacity Factor, and Resource Penetration.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Stack separates LCOE, subsidies, firming cost", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04/15", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04#slide-15", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 9, "name": "Sensitivity Test", "slug": "52-sensitivity-test", "bestFor": "Financial models, forecasting, risk assessment", "matchId": "019de8e9-bb13-71cb-9670-75a55146cdcb", "evidence": "Base-case comparison (p.9) followed by sensitivity to subsidies, fuel, carbon, capital (p.10-13), then firming/competitive comparisons (p.14-15).", "position": 2, "objective": "Stress-test LCOE robustness across multiple parameters", "structure": "The Base Case -> Assumption A Varies -> Assumption B Varies -> Robustness of Conclusion", "confidence": 70, "description": "Show how conclusions change (or don't) when key assumptions vary" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 9, "beatId": "019de8e9-b9e8-7495-9d03-f088e78d95b4", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE/LCOS/LCOH benchmarking, sensitivity, cost-component charts", "position": 1, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 7, "beatId": "019de8e9-ba8d-77ee-ae2c-b5633a8eaa8c", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Deeper Layer", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE, LCOS, LCOH detailed comparisons and sensitivities", "position": 3, "confidence": 35, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "docSlug": "190510b49511442d", "documentTitle": "Lazard LCOE+", "authorId": "RolandBerger", "authorName": "Lazard", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 20, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The chart uses a grouped bar format to compare three cost scenarios (LCOS, Subsidized incl. Energy Community, Subsidized excl. Energy Community) across five storage configurations.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Three cost scenarios shown side by side", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04/20", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04#slide-20", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 25, "from": 20, "name": "Segmentation Split", "slug": "34-segmentation-split", "bestFor": "Customer analysis, market research, resource allocation", "matchId": "019de8e9-bb5a-7354-9f03-67db31523c3b", "evidence": "LCOS comparisons by configuration (p.20-21), revenue-stream matrix (p.22), then case-study results decomposed by segment (p.23-25).", "position": 4, "objective": "Segment LCOS economics by storage use case (IFM vs BTM)", "structure": "The Aggregate View -> Segment A Behavior -> Segment B Behavior -> The Insight in the Difference", "confidence": 55, "description": "Divide a whole into meaningful segments to reveal hidden patterns" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 9, "beatId": "019de8e9-b9e8-7495-9d03-f088e78d95b4", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE/LCOS/LCOH benchmarking, sensitivity, cost-component charts", "position": 1, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 7, "beatId": "019de8e9-ba8d-77ee-ae2c-b5633a8eaa8c", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Deeper Layer", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE, LCOS, LCOH detailed comparisons and sensitivities", "position": 3, "confidence": 35, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "docSlug": "190510b49511442d", "documentTitle": "Lazard LCOE+", "authorId": "RolandBerger", "authorName": "Lazard", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 21, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The chart uses a bar-chart style to represent cost ranges for different storage use cases, categorized by 'In-Front-of-the-Meter' and 'Behind-the-Meter'.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Three subsidy scenarios per config", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04/21", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04#slide-21", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 25, "from": 20, "name": "Segmentation Split", "slug": "34-segmentation-split", "bestFor": "Customer analysis, market research, resource allocation", "matchId": "019de8e9-bb5a-7354-9f03-67db31523c3b", "evidence": "LCOS comparisons by configuration (p.20-21), revenue-stream matrix (p.22), then case-study results decomposed by segment (p.23-25).", "position": 4, "objective": "Segment LCOS economics by storage use case (IFM vs BTM)", "structure": "The Aggregate View -> Segment A Behavior -> Segment B Behavior -> The Insight in the Difference", "confidence": 55, "description": "Divide a whole into meaningful segments to reveal hidden patterns" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 9, "beatId": "019de8e9-b9e8-7495-9d03-f088e78d95b4", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE/LCOS/LCOH benchmarking, sensitivity, cost-component charts", "position": 1, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 7, "beatId": "019de8e9-ba8d-77ee-ae2c-b5633a8eaa8c", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Deeper Layer", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE, LCOS, LCOH detailed comparisons and sensitivities", "position": 3, "confidence": 35, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "docSlug": "190510b49511442d", "documentTitle": "Lazard LCOE+", "authorId": "RolandBerger", "authorName": "Lazard", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 29, "slideType": "comparison_table", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The chart uses a bar-grouped format to compare unsubsidized vs subsidized costs for four different hydrogen production scenarios.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Dark unsubsidized bars vs light subsidized bars", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04/29", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04#slide-29", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 28, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019de8e9-bb7c-75bc-aa8f-b43ffbf7abfc", "evidence": "Subsidized vs unsubsidized green/pink LCOH (p.28) then a 25% blend LCOE compared to standard gas peaking range (p.29).", "position": 5, "objective": "Compare hydrogen pathway costs against gas-peaking benchmark", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 50, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 29, "from": 9, "beatId": "019de8e9-b9e8-7495-9d03-f088e78d95b4", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE/LCOS/LCOH benchmarking, sensitivity, cost-component charts", "position": 1, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 7, "beatId": "019de8e9-ba8d-77ee-ae2c-b5633a8eaa8c", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Deeper Layer", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "LCOE, LCOS, LCOH detailed comparisons and sensitivities", "position": 3, "confidence": 35, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "docSlug": "190510b49511442d", "documentTitle": "Lazard LCOE+", "authorId": "RolandBerger", "authorName": "Lazard", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 32, "slideType": "appendix_data", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The chart breaks down LCOE into four distinct cost categories for different energy sources.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Stack separates Capital, Fixed O&M, Variable O&M, Fuel", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04/32", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-fb14f4d30a04#slide-32", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 33, "from": 32, "name": "Build Up", "slug": "33-build-up", "bestFor": "Pricing justification, cost estimation, market sizing", "matchId": "019de8e9-bba1-778f-8574-555fdd765914", "evidence": "Stacked bars build cost from Capital + Fixed O&M + Variable O&M + Fuel for low-end (p.32) and high-end (p.33).", "position": 6, "objective": "Decompose LCOE into Capital, O&M, Fuel components", "structure": "The Base -> Add Component A -> Add Component B -> Add Component C -> The Total", "confidence": 65, "description": "Start from zero and add components to arrive at a total" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 47, "from": 30, "beatId": "019de8e9-baaf-7498-afad-9147e9866acd", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Core Insight", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Methodology and key-assumptions appendix", "position": 4, "confidence": 35, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a166-85fd4587d7e0", "docSlug": "fe45dc45fa2f865d", "documentTitle": "Saudi Arabia Banking Pulse", "authorId": "misc", "authorName": "Alvarez & Marsal", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 12, "slideType": "kpi_dashboard", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide uses a waterfall-like logic where three sub-components are summed to reach the total operating income.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Plus visual operator shows additive relationship of components.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a166-85fd4587d7e0/12", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a166-85fd4587d7e0", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a166-85fd4587d7e0#slide-12", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 16, "from": 12, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019de781-12a5-73df-8550-43fc2b5851c5", "evidence": "Op income decomp (p12) -> NIM components (p13) -> NIM by bank (p14) -> C/I trend (p15) -> C/I by bank (p16).", "position": 5, "objective": "Zoom into operating efficiency: income mix, NIM, cost-to-income", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 70, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 3, "beatId": "019de781-0fc1-7454-8f9a-0e73ec4b709d", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Macro plus 15+ KPI deep-dives describing Q3'24 banking metrics.", "position": 1, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 21, "from": 7, "beatId": "019de781-111a-7583-87f8-4ade5a2d4710", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Deeper Layer", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Bank-level breakdowns of income, balance sheet, NIM, C/I, risk, ROE.", "position": 3, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-9f66e053a8fa", "docSlug": "95da352d9a7c7e13", "documentTitle": "The Best Service Providers for Commercial Banks, 2025", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "HFS", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 6, "slideType": "industry_trends", "function": "present_framework", "notes": "The slide uses the HFS Horizons framework to categorize service provider capabilities.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Three colored bands separate horizons; right column annotates each", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-9f66e053a8fa/6", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-9f66e053a8fa", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-9f66e053a8fa#slide-6", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 9, "from": 5, "name": "Maturity Curve", "slug": "36-maturity-curve", "bestFor": "Digital transformation, capability building, benchmarking", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d39-b24b38b9c4ec", "evidence": "Intro p.5 lists three horizons; p.6 visual stacks them ascending; themes p.9 ask vision questions.", "position": 1, "objective": "Frame commercial banking maturity via H1->H2->H3 ladder", "structure": "Current Maturity Level -> The Gap to Next Level -> Required Capabilities -> The Roadmap", "confidence": 85, "description": "Show where you are on a progression and what it takes to reach the next level" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 9, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e31-d344ee4ace05", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Intro frames catch-up vs retail; value chain & themes scope the gap", "position": 2, "confidence": 90, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 13, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e31-e2b2f5b12d54", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Value chain, themes, methodology lay out the facts", "position": 1, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-919cc5f5d5c6", "docSlug": "b5a11874d0f30839", "documentTitle": "The future of demand", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 9, "slideType": "market_landscape", "function": "establish_context", "notes": "The diagram uses a value-chain style flow from input to chemical industry to end-user industries.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Three-stage flow: Input -> Chemicals -> Client Industry -> End-user sales", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-919cc5f5d5c6/9", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-919cc5f5d5c6", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a167-919cc5f5d5c6#slide-9", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 8, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3a-baafbf580572", "evidence": "Figures 3-5 repeatedly compare sustainable (green) vs conventional (purple) growth across 10 industries.", "position": 3, "objective": "Contrast sustainability-related vs conventional segment growth", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 85, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 8, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e33-11678288b5e7", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Figures 3-5 quantify sustainability segments outpacing conventional growth", "position": 3, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 10, "from": 3, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e33-1f26de4024c4", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Sections 1 & 2: consumer + industry data chapters", "position": 1, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833", "docSlug": "717a4a3b9695902b", "documentTitle": "US Natural Gas Future", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.707, "pageNumber": 16, "slideType": "strategic_options", "function": "present_solution", "notes": "The slide uses a concentric circle diagram to represent the progression of business models, mapped against a risk/innovation spectrum.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Three nested green concentric rings layer 'maximize / pursue / develop new' models.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833/16", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833#slide-16", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 16, "from": 14, "name": "Capability Gap", "slug": "48-capability-gap", "bestFor": "M&A strategy, digital transformation, organizational design", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-7e35b235b1b3", "evidence": "Upstream gas-to-gigawatts options (p14), midstream unique capabilities (p15), and new midstream business models (p16).", "position": 5, "objective": "Match capabilities of upstream / midstream players to the new gas-for-power demand", "structure": "Required Capabilities -> Current State -> The Gap -> Build vs Buy vs Partner Decision", "confidence": 80, "description": "Compare required capabilities vs. current capabilities to define the build/buy/partner decision" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 16, "from": 16, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-56152d6b8dbe", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Impact & Next Steps", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-impact-next-steps", "evidence": "Midstream new business models + closing 'in sum' synthesis (p16).", "position": 5, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" }, { "to": 16, "from": 12, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-63a2bedff6e6", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Action (Now What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-action-now-what", "evidence": "Strategy plays for upstream, LNG, midstream players.", "position": 3, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-cef1acfbea70", "docSlug": "e1c5cbd0ff41f1fd", "documentTitle": "Victorias Creative and Cultural Economy Fact Pack", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 9, "slideType": "impact_sizing", "function": "quantify_impact", "notes": "The chart uses a custom waterfall-like structure to map different value streams to specific metrics and monetary values.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Dashed horizontal separators divide the three value layers", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-cef1acfbea70/9", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-cef1acfbea70", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-cef1acfbea70#slide-9", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 6, "name": "Build Up", "slug": "33-build-up", "bestFor": "Pricing justification, cost estimation, market sizing", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-cc38e2f31550", "evidence": "Venn definitions then cascading value model adds Economic + Spillover + Social/Cultural layers", "position": 1, "objective": "Define the C/C economy and stack its value layers", "structure": "The Base -> Add Component A -> Add Component B -> Add Component C -> The Total", "confidence": 78, "description": "Start from zero and add components to arrive at a total" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 1, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-c71622d5f173", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Situation & Context", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-situation-context", "evidence": "Cover, exec summary, scope, definitions, cascading value model", "position": 1, "confidence": 82, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" }, { "to": 26, "from": 3, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-d96445060acb", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Sizing data: jobs, GVA, exports, geography, demographics", "position": 1, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true } ] }