{ "kind": "tool", "value": "scenario-analysis", "collectionKey": "slides:tool:scenario-analysis:all-document-kinds:all-producers:all-orientations", "filters": { "documentKinds": [], "sourceTypes": [], "orientations": [] }, "total": 220, "page": 1, "pageSize": 24, "pageCount": 10, "rows": [ { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9f74c35385f1", "docSlug": "4bb31e88e640882d", "documentTitle": "Altagamma 2019 Worldwide Luxury Market Monitor", "authorId": "Bain", "authorName": "Bain", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.777, "pageNumber": 8, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a scenario analysis framework to present 2018 vs 2019E performance metrics.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "title/headline: SOLID BASE CASE SCENARIO FOR 2019, WITH THE COMING HOLIDAY SEASON POTENTIALLY IMPACTING ANNUAL GROWTH", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9f74c35385f1/8", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9f74c35385f1", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-9f74c35385f1#slide-8", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 9, "from": 5, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b312-ff66fef66945", "evidence": "p.8 explicit Worst/Base/Best (20%/70%/10% likelihood); p.9 'bumpy road' alternates", "position": 2, "objective": "Establish base/worst/best scenarios for 2019 and 2025 trajectory", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 85, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 22, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-07a5-761b-9144-5af051098029", "arcName": "The Onion", "arcSlug": "onion", "beatName": "First Layer", "beatSlug": "onion-first-layer", "evidence": "Customer is Present/Chinese/Young/Phy-gital — observable shifts", "position": 2, "confidence": 75, "parentBeatName": "Development", "parentBeatSlug": "development" }, { "to": 41, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-07a5-761b-9144-6e7bee705bc3", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Seven customer-trait sections with evidence", "position": 2, "confidence": 65, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 21, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide is part of a BCG presentation for Struensee & Co. It uses a table to compare 7 scenarios across different military units.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide contains a scenario analysis table.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/21", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-21", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 18, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e1-f6d4e60a1a9c", "evidence": "Action title 'skaleringskoncept og skaleringer for 15 operative kapaciteter' followed by scenario overview tables.", "position": 5, "objective": "Introduce the up/down scaling-scenario concept across 15 capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 80, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 23, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-0625f7d01f7e", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "8 levers applied across operative/material-IT/cross-cutting; capacity-scaling concept.", "position": 3, "confidence": 95, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 175, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide compares four readiness scenarios (1-4) based on deployment notice periods (7, 30, 180, 360 days) and their associated cost and operational impacts.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "type: scenario_analysis", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/175", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-175", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 183, "from": 164, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-40d41af340bf", "evidence": "20 small-multiples 'Skaleringsoversigt' pages showing 5-7 scenarios per capacity (Thetis, EH101, IKK, Leopard, Absalon, etc.).", "position": 24, "objective": "Show up/down scenarios for each of the 15 operative capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 176, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The table compares 6 scenarios based on operational days, crew size, and hull count, with associated financial and temporal implications.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "type: scenario_analysis", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/176", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-176", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 183, "from": 164, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-40d41af340bf", "evidence": "20 small-multiples 'Skaleringsoversigt' pages showing 5-7 scenarios per capacity (Thetis, EH101, IKK, Leopard, Absalon, etc.).", "position": 24, "objective": "Show up/down scenarios for each of the 15 operative capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 177, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide compares three scenarios for vessel deployment, showing trade-offs between operational days, crew/hull requirements, and costs.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "type: scenario_analysis", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/177", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-177", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 183, "from": 164, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-40d41af340bf", "evidence": "20 small-multiples 'Skaleringsoversigt' pages showing 5-7 scenarios per capacity (Thetis, EH101, IKK, Leopard, Absalon, etc.).", "position": 24, "objective": "Show up/down scenarios for each of the 15 operative capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 178, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide compares four scenarios (1-4) based on readiness time (7, 30, 180, 360 days) and their impact on training, logistics, and costs.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "type: scenario_analysis", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/178", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-178", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 183, "from": 164, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-40d41af340bf", "evidence": "20 small-multiples 'Skaleringsoversigt' pages showing 5-7 scenarios per capacity (Thetis, EH101, IKK, Leopard, Absalon, etc.).", "position": 24, "objective": "Show up/down scenarios for each of the 15 operative capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 179, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide compares five scenarios for Hercules aircraft usage, ranging from reduced activity to full operational capacity, including cost drivers like flight hours, crew, and aircraft count.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "type: scenario_analysis", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/179", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-179", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 183, "from": 164, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-40d41af340bf", "evidence": "20 small-multiples 'Skaleringsoversigt' pages showing 5-7 scenarios per capacity (Thetis, EH101, IKK, Leopard, Absalon, etc.).", "position": 24, "objective": "Show up/down scenarios for each of the 15 operative capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 180, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide contains a large redacted area covering the content of the scenario comparison table.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "type: scenario_analysis", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/180", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-180", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 183, "from": 164, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-40d41af340bf", "evidence": "20 small-multiples 'Skaleringsoversigt' pages showing 5-7 scenarios per capacity (Thetis, EH101, IKK, Leopard, Absalon, etc.).", "position": 24, "objective": "Show up/down scenarios for each of the 15 operative capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 181, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide is redacted; the table structure is visible but the content is blacked out. Includes a disclaimer note at the bottom.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "type: scenario_analysis", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/181", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-181", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 183, "from": 164, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-40d41af340bf", "evidence": "20 small-multiples 'Skaleringsoversigt' pages showing 5-7 scenarios per capacity (Thetis, EH101, IKK, Leopard, Absalon, etc.).", "position": 24, "objective": "Show up/down scenarios for each of the 15 operative capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "docSlug": "ee507dc260892073", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 183, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The table compares scenarios 1-7 against a 'current scenario' baseline (Scenario 4).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "type: scenario_analysis", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555/183", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e11cabfae555#slide-183", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 183, "from": 164, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-40d41af340bf", "evidence": "20 small-multiples 'Skaleringsoversigt' pages showing 5-7 scenarios per capacity (Thetis, EH101, IKK, Leopard, Absalon, etc.).", "position": 24, "objective": "Show up/down scenarios for each of the 15 operative capacities", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc", "docSlug": "0798c0fb1aaf0664", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017 Materialesamling Del 2", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 87, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a table to map task types to headcount, then groups them into two distinct scenarios for outsourcing strategy.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide presents two scenarios for DeMars opgaver opdelt i to scenarier, including drift og vedligeholdelse and udvikling.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc/87", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc#slide-87", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 97, "from": 84, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-52e9a3c46a82", "evidence": "Scenario 1 (drift+vedl, fravalgt) vs scenario 2 (udvikling, 3 sub-scenarios).", "position": 4, "objective": "Compare insourcing scenarios for IT development", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 88, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 321, "from": 19, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-2412ddc609c1", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Twelve effektiviseringsforslag with IPT, kategoristyring, IT, organisation, indkøb.", "position": 3, "confidence": 92, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 165, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-30a6df91c9fe", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Baselines, segmentations, current-state diagnoses dominate first half.", "position": 1, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc", "docSlug": "0798c0fb1aaf0664", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017 Materialesamling Del 2", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 89, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "Waterfall chart shows the breakdown of costs from total DeMars budget to addressable drift savings.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide presents a scenario analysis for Scenarie 1, including estimated provenu and reasons for not pursuing it.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc/89", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc#slide-89", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 97, "from": 84, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-52e9a3c46a82", "evidence": "Scenario 1 (drift+vedl, fravalgt) vs scenario 2 (udvikling, 3 sub-scenarios).", "position": 4, "objective": "Compare insourcing scenarios for IT development", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 88, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 321, "from": 19, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-2412ddc609c1", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Twelve effektiviseringsforslag with IPT, kategoristyring, IT, organisation, indkøb.", "position": 3, "confidence": 92, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 165, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-30a6df91c9fe", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Baselines, segmentations, current-state diagnoses dominate first half.", "position": 1, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc", "docSlug": "0798c0fb1aaf0664", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017 Materialesamling Del 2", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 90, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "Includes a waterfall chart for cost baseline and a scenario comparison table for recruitment, cost, and revenue.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide presents a scenario analysis for Scenarie 2, including estimated provenu and different scenarios.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc/90", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc#slide-90", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 97, "from": 84, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-52e9a3c46a82", "evidence": "Scenario 1 (drift+vedl, fravalgt) vs scenario 2 (udvikling, 3 sub-scenarios).", "position": 4, "objective": "Compare insourcing scenarios for IT development", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 88, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 321, "from": 19, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-2412ddc609c1", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Twelve effektiviseringsforslag with IPT, kategoristyring, IT, organisation, indkøb.", "position": 3, "confidence": 92, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 165, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-30a6df91c9fe", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Baselines, segmentations, current-state diagnoses dominate first half.", "position": 1, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc", "docSlug": "0798c0fb1aaf0664", "documentTitle": "Budgetanalyse af Forsvaret 2017 Materialesamling Del 2", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.445, "pageNumber": 145, "slideType": "impact_sizing", "function": "quantify_impact", "notes": "The slide uses a table-like structure to present baseline data, scenario analysis (small vs. large), and qualitative assessment of geographic impact.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "list/bullet: Baseline breakdown including KAKI, VFK, FMI, ITP, KALA, KALU, KAMA. Scenario analysis for small (100-120 mio kr) vs large (200-220 mio kr) scenarios.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc/145", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc#slide-145", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 148, "from": 98, "name": "Quick Win Big Bet", "slug": "47-quick-win-big-bet", "bestFor": "Transformation planning, 100-day plans, resource allocation", "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-54fbecd2dba5", "evidence": "Process in waves (p.112) + decision required on option (p.115) + 200-220 mil. recommended.", "position": 5, "objective": "Sequence IT consolidation in waves with two option scenarios", "structure": "The Full List -> Quick Wins (Low effort, High impact) -> Big Bets (High effort, High impact) -> Sequenced Roadmap", "confidence": 84, "description": "Separate initiatives into immediate wins and longer-term strategic bets" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 321, "from": 19, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-2412ddc609c1", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Solution & Approach", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Twelve effektiviseringsforslag with IPT, kategoristyring, IT, organisation, indkøb.", "position": 3, "confidence": 92, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 165, "from": 9, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-30a6df91c9fe", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Baselines, segmentations, current-state diagnoses dominate first half.", "position": 1, "confidence": 70, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b637-044d1730f159", "docSlug": "cfb2f511f3879630", "documentTitle": "IFRS 9 Impairment Banking Survey", "authorId": "EY", "authorName": "EY", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 26, "slideType": "data_table", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide presents survey data on ECL (Expected Credit Loss) methodologies, specifically focusing on scenario-based approaches.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Multiple economic scenario approach for ECL measurement", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b637-044d1730f159/26", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b637-044d1730f159", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b637-044d1730f159#slide-26", "loopMatches": [], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 33, "from": 26, "beatId": "6ee7170a-0e50-489c-b3b2-8053bf3a7e49", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof", "evidence": "The document provides additional data and analysis on multiple scenario approach and ECL measurement", "position": 3, "confidence": 0.8, "parentBeatName": "Evidence", "parentBeatSlug": "evidence" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-25f500cd77c2", "docSlug": "a69488e8d3c2f90c", "documentTitle": "Infrastructure beyond COVID-19", "authorId": "LEK", "authorName": "L.E.K.", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 16, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "present_framework", "notes": "The slide uses a 2x2 matrix to define four quadrants (A, B, C, D) representing different recovery outcomes.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide presents a 2x2 matrix of COVID-19 recovery scenarios, with different factors that will shape the nature of recovery.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-25f500cd77c2/16", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-25f500cd77c2", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-25f500cd77c2#slide-16", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 36, "from": 13, "name": "Logic Chain", "slug": "01-logic-chain", "bestFor": "Skeptical audiences, controversial recommendations, rigorous analysis", "matchId": "6abfc0fd-a3e3-4c6c-ad2b-6ac65da94ac4", "evidence": "The document uses a logical chain of reasoning to identify and analyze the impacts of COVID-19 on infrastructure sectors.", "position": 0, "objective": "To understand the challenges and complications arising from the pandemic", "structure": "Premise 1 (Accepted truth) -> Premise 2 (Observed fact) -> Therefore... (Inevitable conclusion)", "confidence": 0.8, "description": "Build an airtight chain of logic where each premise leads inevitably to the conclusion" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 36, "from": 13, "beatId": "5fe6f947-38b9-4e68-bb9a-8e34c4e5c3c2", "arcName": "Problem-Agitate-Solution", "arcSlug": "problem-agitate-solution", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "The document identifies challenges and complications arising from the pandemic, including changes in user behavior and economic impacts.", "position": 1, "confidence": 0.8, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd", "docSlug": "3f41fcbc714f036c", "documentTitle": "Reinforcing the New South Wales Southern Shared Network (HumeLink) PADR – EY Market Modelling", "authorId": "EY", "authorName": "EY", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.779, "pageNumber": 13, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "quantify_impact", "notes": "The slide uses stacked bar charts to show the composition of benefits (CAPEX, FOM, Fuel, VOM, REZ Expansion, USE & DSP) for each scenario.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "This slide presents multiple scenario forecasts (Slow Change, Fast Change, Step Change, Central) for cumulative gross market benefits.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd/13", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd#slide-13", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 11, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019de8bb-2d4e-774f-8993-debfdd18bdc6", "evidence": "p11 shows all 12 options across 4 scenarios; pp12-15 then drill into Option 3C capacity, benefits and Snowy 2.0 operation.", "position": 2, "objective": "Zoom from full option set into Option 3C outcomes", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 78, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 12, "beatId": "019de8bb-2c61-768e-975a-e4600d01cf51", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Capacity, cumulative benefits and Snowy 2.0 outcomes shown for Option 3C across scenarios.", "position": 4, "confidence": 65, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 15, "from": 11, "beatId": "019de8bb-2ce7-749d-9bdb-49b5dc65a1ab", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Option 3C selected and proven across scenarios.", "position": 2, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd", "docSlug": "3f41fcbc714f036c", "documentTitle": "Reinforcing the New South Wales Southern Shared Network (HumeLink) PADR – EY Market Modelling", "authorId": "EY", "authorName": "EY", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.779, "pageNumber": 14, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The charts show the delta in GW capacity for various energy sources over time (2020-2045).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "This slide presents capacity differences for Option 3C outcomes across various scenarios (Step Change, Fast Change, Slow Change, Central).", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd/14", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd#slide-14", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 11, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019de8bb-2d4e-774f-8993-debfdd18bdc6", "evidence": "p11 shows all 12 options across 4 scenarios; pp12-15 then drill into Option 3C capacity, benefits and Snowy 2.0 operation.", "position": 2, "objective": "Zoom from full option set into Option 3C outcomes", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 78, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 12, "beatId": "019de8bb-2c61-768e-975a-e4600d01cf51", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Capacity, cumulative benefits and Snowy 2.0 outcomes shown for Option 3C across scenarios.", "position": 4, "confidence": 65, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 15, "from": 11, "beatId": "019de8bb-2ce7-749d-9bdb-49b5dc65a1ab", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Option 3C selected and proven across scenarios.", "position": 2, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd", "docSlug": "3f41fcbc714f036c", "documentTitle": "Reinforcing the New South Wales Southern Shared Network (HumeLink) PADR – EY Market Modelling", "authorId": "EY", "authorName": "EY", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.779, "pageNumber": 15, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide compares two sets of line charts showing pump and generation capacity factors over time.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide discusses Snowy 2.0 operation increases under different scenarios (Step Change, Fast Change, Slow Change).", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd/15", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b636-ed07d758b8cd#slide-15", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 11, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019de8bb-2d4e-774f-8993-debfdd18bdc6", "evidence": "p11 shows all 12 options across 4 scenarios; pp12-15 then drill into Option 3C capacity, benefits and Snowy 2.0 operation.", "position": 2, "objective": "Zoom from full option set into Option 3C outcomes", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 78, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 15, "from": 12, "beatId": "019de8bb-2c61-768e-975a-e4600d01cf51", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Capacity, cumulative benefits and Snowy 2.0 outcomes shown for Option 3C across scenarios.", "position": 4, "confidence": 65, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 15, "from": 11, "beatId": "019de8bb-2ce7-749d-9bdb-49b5dc65a1ab", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Option 3C selected and proven across scenarios.", "position": 2, "confidence": 50, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f", "docSlug": "52e21d70f3295259", "documentTitle": "True-Luxury Global Consumer Insights 9th Edition", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.778, "pageNumber": 6, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "compare_options", "notes": "The slide uses a bar chart to show 2022 vs 2023F, with callouts indicating the percentage growth ranges for the two scenarios.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "We envision 2 evolution scenarios based on key geographies outlook.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f/6", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-9da085bdac1f#slide-6", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 8, "from": 5, "name": "Zoom In", "slug": "06-zoom-in", "bestFor": "Technical deep-dives, case studies, detailed analysis", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-28a7f3c9d586", "evidence": "Total market growth (p5) -> scenarios (p6) -> geography (p7) -> top-of-pyramid (p8).", "position": 1, "objective": "Zoom from total luxury market to wealthiest-segment focus", "structure": "The Big Picture -> Key Area of Focus -> Specific Detail -> Implication", "confidence": 78, "description": "Start broad, then progressively focus on specific details that prove your point" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 8, "from": 2, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e2-fac699524ddb", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Situation & Context", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-situation-context", "evidence": "Study intro + 'Futureproof' market thriving and pyramid analysis", "position": 1, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" }, { "to": 17, "from": 5, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-0d57d0183315", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Facts (What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what", "evidence": "Market sizing, growth, trends — the data layer", "position": 1, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Setup", "parentBeatSlug": "setup" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80", "docSlug": "b87718276d2e8ef8", "documentTitle": "US Mail Volumes to 2020", "authorId": "BCG", "authorName": "BCG", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.294, "pageNumber": 20, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The matrix uses a 3x3 grid to show volume outcomes. Callouts provide context for the extreme scenarios (top-right and bottom-left).", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "table/scenario: 3x3 matrix of volume projections", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80/20", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-b4f6703d5f80#slide-20", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 19, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-8fc7077006e7", "evidence": "p20 'All reasonable scenarios suggest volume will continue to decline'; p21 lists external/USPS events", "position": 4, "objective": "Test robustness of decline through revenue gap and scenarios", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 75, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 21, "from": 15, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-6d59c738dacb", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Evidence & Proof", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-solution-approach", "evidence": "Peer post benchmarks, broadband regression, revenue gap, scenarios", "position": 3, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Turn", "parentBeatSlug": "turn" }, { "to": 21, "from": 18, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-7d013d49ef95", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Implications section: revenue gap, scenarios, external events", "position": 2, "confidence": 72, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }, { "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-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": 3, "slideType": "key_messages", "function": "summarize", "notes": "The slide is text-heavy, structured in two columns with bullet points and paragraphs.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide presents five scenarios for the US natural gas industry: Blue Rush, America First, Export Rush, Slow Burn, and Energy Security.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833/3", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833#slide-3", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 4, "from": 2, "name": "Aha Moment", "slug": "03-aha-moment", "bestFor": "Data-heavy sections, research findings, analytical arguments", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-6cf827d86df9", "evidence": "Setup p2-3 builds the question; exec summary p4 delivers BCG's five-scenario insight.", "position": 1, "objective": "Frame the question and reveal BCG's headline finding (no peak in 10 years)", "structure": "The Problem/Question -> What the Data Shows -> The Insight", "confidence": 75, "description": "Establish a tension, present data, then deliver the insight that changes everything" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 9, "from": 2, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-47c492dd7fd5", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Situation & Context", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-situation-context", "evidence": "Industry context, superpower rise, demand trifecta charts (p5-9).", "position": 1, "confidence": 88, "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": 10, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "present_solution", "notes": "The slide combines a diagnostic overview of industry challenges with a scenario-based framework for future outlooks.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "The slide presents five strategic paths for the US natural gas industry, including growth dependencies, infrastructure constraints, and investment issues.", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833/10", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833#slide-10", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 10, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-77dc71d9f4e4", "evidence": "Five named scenarios (Blue Rush, America First, Export Rush, Slow Burn, Energy Insecurity) plus three constraint pillars.", "position": 3, "objective": "Enumerate five futures and the constraints that decide which one occurs", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-4b24bc58ec38", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Five scenarios + three constraints framing market strain (p10-11).", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 11, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-5fe582f382c2", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Constraints + scenario forecasts spell out implications.", "position": 2, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "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": 11, "slideType": "scenario_analysis", "function": "analyze_data", "notes": "The slide combines a quantitative scenario analysis with a qualitative constraint framework.", "imagePath": null, "matchCount": 1, "evidence": "Five scenarios that BCG developed", "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833/11", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b635-7c7f95dc2833#slide-11", "loopMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 10, "name": "Scenario Fork", "slug": "35-scenario-fork", "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations", "matchId": "019dd95a-088c-724c-b30f-77dc71d9f4e4", "evidence": "Five named scenarios (Blue Rush, America First, Export Rush, Slow Burn, Energy Insecurity) plus three constraint pillars.", "position": 3, "objective": "Enumerate five futures and the constraints that decide which one occurs", "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation", "confidence": 90, "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions" } ], "arcBeatMatches": [ { "to": 11, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-4b24bc58ec38", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication", "evidence": "Five scenarios + three constraints framing market strain (p10-11).", "position": 2, "confidence": 88, "parentBeatName": "Complication", "parentBeatSlug": "complication" }, { "to": 11, "from": 10, "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87e3-5fe582f382c2", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what", "evidence": "Constraints + scenario forecasts spell out implications.", "position": 2, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": "Reflection", "parentBeatSlug": "reflection" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true } ] }