{ "kind": "tool", "value": "peer-gap-chart-recipe", "collectionKey": "slides:tool:peer-gap-chart-recipe:all-document-kinds:all-producers:all-orientations", "filters": { "documentKinds": [], "sourceTypes": [], "orientations": [] }, "total": 1022, "page": 1, "pageSize": 24, "pageCount": 43, "rows": [ { "docId": "019de510-447c-727e-a9ff-5331993443f6", "docSlug": "34204222d2bcdfe1a7793fd1169977ba", "documentTitle": "Advent | SPAC Presentation Deck | 45 slides", "authorId": "advent", "authorName": "Advent", "documentKindSlug": "pitchdeck", "documentKindLabel": "Pitch deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "investment_bank", "sourceTypeLabel": "Investment bank", "presentationDate": "2021-01-01 00:00:00", "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.7777778, "pageNumber": 36, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "Includes market capitalization and revenue CAGR data for context.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 2, "evidence": "chart/bar-grouped: EV / EBITDA Multiples · chart/bar-grouped: EV / REVENUE Multiples", "slideHref": "/slides/019de510-447c-727e-a9ff-5331993443f6/36", "deckHref": "/decks/019de510-447c-727e-a9ff-5331993443f6", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019de510-447c-727e-a9ff-5331993443f6#slide-36", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019de06f-5d47-703c-9f66-5e75be9068ba", "docSlug": "9c376bc783b5b9d16f8820918923e12e", "documentTitle": "AgroFresh | SPAC Presentation Deck | 48 slides", "authorId": "agrofresh", "authorName": "AgroFresh", "documentKindSlug": "pitchdeck", "documentKindLabel": "Pitch deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "investment_bank", "sourceTypeLabel": "Investment bank", "presentationDate": "2015-06-01 00:00:00", "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.3333334, "pageNumber": 33, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses bar charts to compare AgroFresh against four distinct peer segments: Food/Ingredients Specialties, Service Oriented Comps, High Margin/High Value Specialties, and Pure-Play AgChem Comps.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 2, "evidence": "chart/bar-vertical: 2015E FCF Yield · chart/bar-vertical: Firm Value / 2015E EBITDA", "slideHref": "/slides/019de06f-5d47-703c-9f66-5e75be9068ba/33", "deckHref": "/decks/019de06f-5d47-703c-9f66-5e75be9068ba", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019de06f-5d47-703c-9f66-5e75be9068ba#slide-33", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019de06f-5d47-703c-9f66-5e75be9068ba", "docSlug": "9c376bc783b5b9d16f8820918923e12e", "documentTitle": "AgroFresh | SPAC Presentation Deck | 48 slides", "authorId": "agrofresh", "authorName": "AgroFresh", "documentKindSlug": "pitchdeck", "documentKindLabel": "Pitch deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "investment_bank", "sourceTypeLabel": "Investment bank", "presentationDate": "2015-06-01 00:00:00", "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.3333334, "pageNumber": 34, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses bar charts to compare AgroFresh (highlighted in yellow) against competitors categorized into four segments: Food/Ingredients Specialties, Service Oriented Comps, High Margin/High Value Specialties, and Pure-Play AgChem Comps.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 2, "evidence": "chart/bar-vertical: 2015E Cash Conversion · chart/bar-vertical: 2015E EBITDA Margin", "slideHref": "/slides/019de06f-5d47-703c-9f66-5e75be9068ba/34", "deckHref": "/decks/019de06f-5d47-703c-9f66-5e75be9068ba", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019de06f-5d47-703c-9f66-5e75be9068ba#slide-34", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019de073-8ecf-767d-8da1-92c2edeeb754", "docSlug": "615796c2ee7cde8eb6c96842963f4ee0", "documentTitle": "Morgan Stanley | Investment Banking Pitch Book | 30 slides", "authorId": "morgan-stanley", "authorName": "Morgan Stanley", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "investment_bank", "sourceTypeLabel": "Investment bank", "presentationDate": "2022-09-01 00:00:00", "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.2938006, "pageNumber": 24, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses line charts to track valuation trends. Data points represent specific valuation multiples at the end of the period.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 2, "evidence": "chart/line: AV / NTM Revenue · chart/line: P / NTM FCF", "slideHref": "/slides/019de073-8ecf-767d-8da1-92c2edeeb754/24", "deckHref": "/decks/019de073-8ecf-767d-8da1-92c2edeeb754", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019de073-8ecf-767d-8da1-92c2edeeb754#slide-24", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-3e15c6e3bf72", "docSlug": "da48f73eb97e2470", "documentTitle": "2018 True-Luxury Global Consumer Insight", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 50, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a net satisfaction index calculated as the difference between respondents increasing and reducing spend.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "chart/bar-vertical: Satisfaction index bar chart", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-3e15c6e3bf72/50", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-3e15c6e3bf72", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-3e15c6e3bf72#slide-50", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 51, "from": 41, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d40-3e11f88f929e", "evidence": "Opens with 3 Chinese segments (~55% spend), then digital ecosystem, WeChat journey, ROPO, brand ranking.", "position": 9, "objective": "Zoom into the Chinese consumer", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 85, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 51, "from": 14, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e38-15ef0d1686df", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Data on casualwear, social, channels, then Millennial & Chinese deep dives", "position": 4, "confidence": 78, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 51, "from": 30, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e38-23f7258e57dc", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Millennial + Chinese segment deep dives", "position": 2, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437", "docSlug": "4055ca7b5fd4017d", "documentTitle": "AUTOMOTIVE –OES", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 13, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a grouped bar chart structure to compare performance metrics across segments.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Grouped bar chart showing RODI expected vs achieved for Champions, Contenders, and Cadets in Automotive-OES and Cross-Industry.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437/13", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437#slide-13", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 13, "from": 12, "name": "Segmentation Split", "slug": "34-segmentation-split", "bestFor": "Customer analysis, market research, resource allocation", "matchId": "019de0c4-94c5-768d-9efe-936cf587a3d1", "evidence": "Donut tiers (p12) and RODI bars by tier (p13) explicitly segment the sample.", "position": 3, "objective": "Split the population into Champions/Contenders/Cadets and show the performance delta", "structure": "The Aggregate View -> Segment A Behavior -> Segment B Behavior -> The Insight in the Difference", "confidence": 90, "description": "Divide a whole into meaningful segments to reveal hidden patterns" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 18, "from": 8, "beatId": "019de0c4-9356-77a3-8ed2-0eb71e802e2f", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Champions vs Cadets gap, funding/alignment roadblocks, cost of inaction", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 13, "from": 3, "beatId": "019de0c4-940d-76e1-ad2b-fc3bee58b32e", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "survey scope and Champions/Contenders/Cadets RODI facts", "position": 1, "confidence": 62, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437", "docSlug": "4055ca7b5fd4017d", "documentTitle": "AUTOMOTIVE –OES", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 25, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart highlights a significant gap in perceived importance of digital skills between high-performing 'Champions' and other respondents.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Horizontal bar chart showing skill importance percentages for Champions vs Others", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437/25", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437#slide-25", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 28, "from": 25, "name": "Capability Gap", "slug": "48-capability-gap", "bestFor": "M&A strategy, digital transformation, organizational design", "matchId": "019de0c4-957f-74c8-9de7-58acf62073ea", "evidence": "Top skills (p25), top partnerships (p26) and top capabilities (p28) all benchmark Champions vs Others.", "position": 8, "objective": "Show the capability, skill and partnership gap between Champions and Others", "structure": "Required Capabilities -> Current State -> The Gap -> Build vs Buy vs Partner Decision", "confidence": 82, "description": "Compare required capabilities vs. current capabilities to define the build/buy/partner decision" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 28, "from": 25, "beatId": "019de0c4-939e-7269-ac28-020f6d375f9e", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Champions-vs-Others benchmarks for skills, partnerships, capabilities", "position": 4, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 19, "beatId": "019de0c4-9457-7368-85ac-3ac3dad539ad", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Action (Now What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "4 practices, roadmap, capabilities, get-in-touch CTA", "position": 3, "confidence": 62, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437", "docSlug": "4055ca7b5fd4017d", "documentTitle": "AUTOMOTIVE –OES", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 26, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": null, "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Grouped bar chart showing partnership types (Competitors, Suppliers, Channel Partners, Academia, Tech Partners) for Champions vs Others", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437/26", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437#slide-26", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 28, "from": 25, "name": "Capability Gap", "slug": "48-capability-gap", "bestFor": "M&A strategy, digital transformation, organizational design", "matchId": "019de0c4-957f-74c8-9de7-58acf62073ea", "evidence": "Top skills (p25), top partnerships (p26) and top capabilities (p28) all benchmark Champions vs Others.", "position": 8, "objective": "Show the capability, skill and partnership gap between Champions and Others", "structure": "Required Capabilities -> Current State -> The Gap -> Build vs Buy vs Partner Decision", "confidence": 82, "description": "Compare required capabilities vs. current capabilities to define the build/buy/partner decision" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 28, "from": 25, "beatId": "019de0c4-939e-7269-ac28-020f6d375f9e", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Champions-vs-Others benchmarks for skills, partnerships, capabilities", "position": 4, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 19, "beatId": "019de0c4-9457-7368-85ac-3ac3dad539ad", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Action (Now What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "4 practices, roadmap, capabilities, get-in-touch CTA", "position": 3, "confidence": 62, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437", "docSlug": "4055ca7b5fd4017d", "documentTitle": "AUTOMOTIVE –OES", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 28, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": null, "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "TOP 5 CAPABILITIES", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437/28", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca0-7518-b73b-acee6d3c5437#slide-28", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 28, "from": 25, "name": "Capability Gap", "slug": "48-capability-gap", "bestFor": "M&A strategy, digital transformation, organizational design", "matchId": "019de0c4-957f-74c8-9de7-58acf62073ea", "evidence": "Top skills (p25), top partnerships (p26) and top capabilities (p28) all benchmark Champions vs Others.", "position": 8, "objective": "Show the capability, skill and partnership gap between Champions and Others", "structure": "Required Capabilities -> Current State -> The Gap -> Build vs Buy vs Partner Decision", "confidence": 82, "description": "Compare required capabilities vs. current capabilities to define the build/buy/partner decision" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 28, "from": 25, "beatId": "019de0c4-939e-7269-ac28-020f6d375f9e", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Champions-vs-Others benchmarks for skills, partnerships, capabilities", "position": 4, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 29, "from": 19, "beatId": "019de0c4-9457-7368-85ac-3ac3dad539ad", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Action (Now What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "4 practices, roadmap, capabilities, get-in-touch CTA", "position": 3, "confidence": 62, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "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": 28, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a floating bar representation to show the range between first and third quartiles, with a red dot indicating the median.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "chart/bar-vertical: Floating bar chart showing TSR distribution by sector", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57/28", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-5d89529e8c57#slide-28", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 31, "from": 27, "name": "Precedent", "slug": "09-precedent", "bestFor": "Risk mitigation, strategy validation, building confidence in new approaches", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-cde6346c3cc0", "evidence": "Hydrocarbon growth question → S&P share shrinking → Kodak vs Fuji precedent → $1T+ carbon-major opportunity", "position": 7, "objective": "reframe O&G strategic choice through Kodak/Fuji", "structure": "The Precedent Case -> What Happened -> The Parallel -> Applied Learning", "confidence": 82, "description": "Use historical or external examples to validate your approach" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 33, "from": 26, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-ac4e95d4335b", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Impact & Next Steps", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-impact-next-steps", "evidence": "O&G strategic question, Kodak/Fuji choice, $1T+ opportunity, discussion", "position": 5, "confidence": 82, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" }, { "to": 33, "from": 26, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-bbce0888c281", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Action (Now What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-action-now-what", "evidence": "O&G choice & opportunity sizing", "position": 3, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d3738a63434c", "docSlug": "2862941a98bffda6", "documentTitle": "Corporate Ventures in Sweden", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 12, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "CV stands for Corporate Venture. Data compares Sweden Top 50 (2016) vs Global Top 500 (2012).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide presents a comparison of Swedish Corporate Venture adoption rate to the global average.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d3738a63434c/12", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d3738a63434c", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d3738a63434c#slide-12", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 13, "from": 11, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-dcf39861de57", "evidence": "R&D-intensity bubble chart + 'Sweden 20% vs global 33%, aspirational 32%' bars + landscape evolution.", "position": 4, "objective": "Quantify Sweden's CV underperformance vs global benchmarks", "structure": "Our Performance -> Industry Average -> Best-in-Class -> The Gap = The Opportunity", "confidence": 85, "description": "Compare performance against best-in-class to quantify the opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 14, "from": 11, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-cab8ec6916e2", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "R&D-intensity correlation, Sweden 20% vs global 33%, Swedish CVC examples.", "position": 4, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-ea33b3a921f0", "docSlug": "22f6af8f6e5a7ac9", "documentTitle": "Decoding Chinese Internet 2.0 Next Chapter", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 8, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a BCG-developed indicator (eGDP) to measure the Internet economy.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "peer_benchmark type and chart/bar-vertical with metric/primary", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-ea33b3a921f0/8", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-ea33b3a921f0", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-ea33b3a921f0#slide-8", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 10, "from": 5, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-e83dcfb64efa", "evidence": "Every slide juxtaposes China vs US/peers (710m vs 290m, 6.9% GDP, 5 of 10 giants).", "position": 1, "objective": "Establish China's Internet scale via US/G20 benchmark", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 80, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 10, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-d387b2858b21", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Surface Observation", "beatSlug": "onion-surface-observation", "evidence": "Size/growth/penetration headlines vs US & G20", "position": 1, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" }, { "to": 22, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-e7cb6cab6316", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Size, users, competition data", "position": 1, "confidence": 58, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-272f25908551", "docSlug": "779b6b192abf180f", "documentTitle": "Industrial Speedsters How advanced technologies can turbocharge your speed to market", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 7, "slideType": "data_table", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide uses stacked bar charts to visualize time-to-market components and callouts to highlight the reduction in weeks and percentages between periods.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide compares time to market reductions across different segments.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-272f25908551/7", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-272f25908551", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-272f25908551#slide-7", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 6, "name": "Segmentation Split", "slug": "34-segmentation-split", "bestFor": "Customer analysis, market research, resource allocation", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fd-712f-b775-6fe97dc697a8", "evidence": "p.6 gives aggregate 57→29 weeks; p.7 splits IEE/HE/IES/CD as small multiples revealing heavy equipment with -32.7%", "position": 1, "objective": "Show TTM at industry level then disaggregate by segment to surface heavy-equipment as the leader", "structure": "The Aggregate View -> Segment A Behavior -> Segment B Behavior -> The Insight in the Difference", "confidence": 80, "description": "Divide a whole into meaningful segments to reveal hidden patterns" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 8, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820c-6464bd847b96", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Industry-wide TTM reductions, segment variation, leading question on tech link", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 7, "from": 4, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820c-7584eca25ec2", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Survey, framework, industry-wide and segment TTM data", "position": 1, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-2f147326ffb1", "docSlug": "bbff997ea013e081", "documentTitle": "Innovation Unleashed Building a culture that drives sustained growth", "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": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a bar chart comparison to illustrate the performance delta between two segments.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Pacesetters also outperformed Stragglers on several other financial metrics, like improved profits and cost efficiency.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-2f147326ffb1/6", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-2f147326ffb1", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-2f147326ffb1#slide-6", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 5, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fd-712f-b775-7d9830a24610", "evidence": "p5 sets up the two cohorts; p6 shows 6.5X / 2.2X / 4.2X advantages; p7 charts the $11.8bn revenue gap.", "position": 2, "objective": "Contrast Pacesetters vs Stragglers and quantify the gap", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 90, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 7, "from": 2, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820c-82d5c70dd096", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Situation & Context", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-situation-context", "evidence": "Frames innovation culture importance, introduces flywheel and Pacesetter vs Straggler benchmark.", "position": 1, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" }, { "to": 9, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820c-969b986656e9", "arcName": "The Transformation Tale", "arcSlug": "transformation-tale", "beatName": "Current Reality (Pain)", "beatSlug": "transformation-tale-current-reality-pain", "evidence": "Stragglers lag, $11.8bn forgone, 81% lack behaviors.", "position": 1, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 50, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses two bar charts to illustrate the decline in public perception of Animal Control services.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Comparison of Dallas performance vs Austin and San Antonio", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/50", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-50", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 142, "from": 45, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87dd-9f808a4e90ee", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Deep-dive recommendations, full report exhibits, peer benchmarks, S/N math", "position": 4, "confidence": 92, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 83, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide includes a specific callout for Dallas (DAS Only) and a legend distinguishing benchmark vs non-benchmark cities.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Scatter plot of Live release rate (%) vs Animal intake", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/83", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-83", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 91, "from": 78, "name": "Benchmark Gap", "slug": "39-benchmark-gap", "bestFor": "Performance improvement, competitive analysis, target setting", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-4cbc2d0be8fb", "evidence": "ASO staffing vs peers, intake per ASO, budget exhibits", "position": 15, "objective": "Diagnose DAS operations against peer benchmarks", "structure": "Our Performance -> Industry Average -> Best-in-Class -> The Gap = The Opportunity", "confidence": 76, "description": "Compare performance against best-in-class to quantify the opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 142, "from": 45, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87dd-9f808a4e90ee", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Deep-dive recommendations, full report exhibits, peer benchmarks, S/N math", "position": 4, "confidence": 92, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 172, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a comparative bar chart approach to highlight operational inefficiency at DAS relative to other municipal animal services.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide shows a comparison of DAS with peers, which is a common use case for a peer-gap chart.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/172", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-172", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 267, "from": 161, "name": "Build Up", "slug": "33-build-up", "bestFor": "Pricing justification, cost estimation, market sizing", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-5934a57a4387", "evidence": "Repeated triplet pattern: e.g., p.166/167/168, p.178/179/180, p.188/189", "position": 18, "objective": "For each initiative, build up Overview → Estimated Impact → Resource Requirements", "structure": "The Base -> Add Component A -> Add Component B -> Add Component C -> The Total", "confidence": 82, "description": "Start from zero and add components to arrive at a total" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 255, "slideType": "recommendation", "function": "recommend", "notes": "Slide 6.2 from a BCG deck regarding Dallas Animal Services.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "chart/bar-vertical with Municipal Animal Services Budget ($/person)", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/255", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-255", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 267, "from": 161, "name": "Build Up", "slug": "33-build-up", "bestFor": "Pricing justification, cost estimation, market sizing", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-5934a57a4387", "evidence": "Repeated triplet pattern: e.g., p.166/167/168, p.178/179/180, p.188/189", "position": 18, "objective": "For each initiative, build up Overview → Estimated Impact → Resource Requirements", "structure": "The Base -> Add Component A -> Add Component B -> Add Component C -> The Total", "confidence": 82, "description": "Start from zero and add components to arrive at a total" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "docSlug": "f48d45408c26f5a2", "documentTitle": "Loose dogs in Dallas Strategic Recommendations", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 319, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses bar charts to contrast staffing density and operational efficiency (intake) against a peer benchmark mean.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "callout: DAS has 45% more ASOs per million people than benchmarks... but, DAS field collection lags by 20%", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21/319", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-d42adb9ada21#slide-319", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 358, "from": 311, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e5-64284a59ff04", "evidence": "Section '3 DAS Operations'; intake, kennels, costs, LRR breakdown", "position": 21, "objective": "Detailed zoom on DAS shelter operations, length-of-stay, costs, outcomes", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 76, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-3a3680d6162e", "docSlug": "e6b3796b5d45dab4", "documentTitle": "Make the leap, take the lead: Tech strategies for innovation and growth", "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": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart uses a stacked area representation to visualize the widening revenue gap between two cohorts over a 10-year period (2015-2025).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "peer_benchmark components include a chart and callouts, indicative of a peer-gap chart", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-3a3680d6162e/9", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-3a3680d6162e", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-3a3680d6162e#slide-9", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 5, "name": "Tale Two Worlds", "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds", "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d37-3aa280cc16f9", "evidence": "Section 'At the leading edge' systematically benchmarks Leaders vs Laggards on adoption, growth, value, experience.", "position": 1, "objective": "Contrast Leaders against Laggards to size the gap", "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication", "confidence": 90, "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 12, "from": 8, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820d-1333d379dbf0", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Leaders vs Laggards: 5x growth gap, widening divide.", "position": 2, "confidence": 90, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 12, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820d-21a6d205c0ef", "arcName": "The Transformation Tale", "arcSlug": "transformation-tale", "beatName": "Current Reality (Pain)", "beatSlug": "transformation-tale-current-reality-pain", "evidence": "Laggards falling behind, growth gap widening.", "position": 1, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-465de0183eba", "docSlug": "bb039b619ada143e", "documentTitle": "Modern Networks", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 19, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide uses a vertical bar chart with a bridge/multiplier callout to compare different levels of network modernization shift.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "chart/bar-vertical: Vertical bar chart showing likelihood percentages (28%, 28%, 32%, 51%) based on shift from network maintenance spend share to modernization between 2019 and 2022", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-465de0183eba/19", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-465de0183eba", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-465de0183eba#slide-19", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 17, "name": "Before After", "slug": "21-before-after", "bestFor": "Product demos, process improvements, ROI justification", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d38-3ea8333e978c", "evidence": "Imperative I diagram contrasts 0%->100% modernization, -21% cost reduction, 2.4x innovators, British Sugar proof", "position": 4, "objective": "Show measurable delta from flipping budget legacy->modernization", "structure": "The Old Way (Pain) -> The Moment of Change -> The New Way (Glory) -> The Measurable Delta", "confidence": 80, "description": "Show the dramatic contrast between the old way and the new way through side-by-side comparison" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 32, "from": 17, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820d-ef1ffd9c3846", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Three imperatives, cost models, 4 client cases, maturity bar comparison", "position": 4, "confidence": 92, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" }, { "to": 33, "from": 17, "beatId": "019dd95a-0680-7418-820d-fea91efea593", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Action (Now What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-action-now-what", "evidence": "Three imperatives plus closing CTA", "position": 3, "confidence": 65, "parentBeatName": "Resolution", "parentBeatSlug": "resolution" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-e726c3075bde", "docSlug": "4e37d83ee6e25fae", "documentTitle": "Oil Gas EP Incentive Compensation", "authorId": "AlvarezMarsal", "authorName": "Alvarez & Marsal", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "portrait", "aspectRatio": 0.773, "pageNumber": 14, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "Data presented in two grouped bar charts comparing LTI practices across years and market cap segments.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The chart to the right shows the number of LTI vehicles granted at each company.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-e726c3075bde/14", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-e726c3075bde", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-e726c3075bde#slide-14", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 12, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3f-61fc47176d7c", "evidence": "Quote intro then 7 data slides each contributing one LTI design dimension", "position": 4, "objective": "Layer LTI evidence (vehicle mix, performance metrics, period, payout) into pattern of best practice", "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": 19, "from": 8, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e36-cfce13a66087", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "Deeper Layer", "beatSlug": "onion-deeper-layer", "evidence": "Annual incentive plan and LTI mechanics decomposed", "position": 3, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Development", "parentBeatSlug": "development" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88", "docSlug": "04e00f0265e26e9f", "documentTitle": "The disability inclusion imperative", "authorId": "Accenture", "authorName": "Accenture", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 13, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The chart compares revenue per employee ($845k vs $781k) to demonstrate the productivity advantage of disability inclusion leaders.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Leaders are more likely to outperform industry peers in productivity by 25%", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88/13", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-808e8065cd88#slide-13", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 17, "from": 11, "name": "Pattern Hunter", "slug": "02-pattern-hunter", "bestFor": "Time-pressed audiences, building consensus, when data is strong", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3a-71aad0d724c7", "evidence": "Revenue/net income/economic profit gains, productivity edge, half-trillion market, Microsoft case, 5x Glassdoor mentions, 4x positive reviews.", "position": 3, "objective": "Stack multiple proof points that leaders outperform", "structure": "Evidence A -> Evidence B -> Evidence C -> Pattern/Conclusion", "confidence": 82, "description": "Group multiple pieces of evidence that together point to a pattern or conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e32-ae0a4b976654", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Business case + culture challenge (76% don't disclose) — the gap and why it persists", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 19, "from": 6, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e32-be56e502f9fc", "arcName": "The Transformation Tale", "arcSlug": "transformation-tale", "beatName": "Current Reality (Pain)", "beatSlug": "transformation-tale-current-reality-pain", "evidence": "Workforce gap + culture challenge with concealment data", "position": 1, "confidence": 55, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-fc144b0ce4a2", "docSlug": "c340b50d0e568422", "documentTitle": "UAE Health Sector Pulse Quarter 1, 2021", "authorId": "AlvarezMarsal", "authorName": "Alvarez & Marsal", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 17, "slideType": "peer_benchmark", "function": "compare_peers", "notes": "The slide uses a dual-chart layout: a time-series bar chart for UAE trends and a cross-sectional bar chart for international comparison.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide compares UAE's insurance premium growth to that of developed nations.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-fc144b0ce4a2/17", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-fc144b0ce4a2", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b633-fc144b0ce4a2#slide-17", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 17, "name": "So What Cascade", "slug": "41-so-what-cascade", "bestFor": "Data presentations, executive summaries, driving to recommendations", "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3f-dee653cd39a2", "evidence": "Premiums up 8% (p.17) → Dubai expenditure +7.7% (p.18) → 41% goes to hospitals breakdown (p.19) — each slide answers 'so what?' on the prior.", "position": 3, "objective": "Cascade premium and expenditure data to where the money goes", "structure": "The Data -> So What? (Insight 1) -> So What? (Insight 2) -> So What? (The Action)", "confidence": 74, "description": "Chain insights together, each answering 'so what?' until you reach the actionable conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 19, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e37-61fbea7d3f38", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Demographics, disease, spend, providers, beds, payers — descriptive data slides.", "position": 1, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" }, { "to": 19, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e37-70b16e072b96", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Covid disruption, provider oversupply, declining occupancy, rising payer cost.", "position": 2, "confidence": 58, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 22, "from": 7, "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e37-78115b9da1c6", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "Sourced charts and DHA/World Bank data interwoven through every analytical slide.", "position": 4, "confidence": 58, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true } ] }