{
  "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-bc8e3e952c51",
  "docSlug": "bc9c22881d997435",
  "documentTitle": "Reshaping NYCHA support functions",
  "authorId": "BCG",
  "authorName": "BCG",
  "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting",
  "presentationDate": null,
  "orientation": "landscape",
  "aspectRatio": 1.401,
  "pageNumber": 15,
  "pageCount": 112,
  "prevPage": 14,
  "nextPage": 16,
  "slideType": "appendix_data",
  "function": "compare_peers",
  "density": "balanced",
  "nDataPoints": 85,
  "notes": "The slide uses a diamond-marked matrix to indicate the presence of specific functional departments within different organizations.",
  "elementsJson": [
    "action_title",
    "comparison_table",
    "footnote"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-bc8e3e952c51/15",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-bc8e3e952c51",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-bc8e3e952c51.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-bc8e3e952c51#slide-15",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.4,
        "w": 0.02,
        "x": 0.97,
        "y": 0.5
      },
      "kind": "disclaimer",
      "text": "Copyright 2012 by The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. All rights reserved.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "d640c28f-2fd4-475c-aebe-700805097a94",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "metric",
      "text": "Functions benchmarked per peer: 12 functions x 6 PHAs",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "primary",
      "toolName": "Quantification",
      "toolSlug": "quantification",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd951-9f62-7003-b12f-7226a01eb525",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.7,
        "w": 0.46,
        "x": 0.03,
        "y": 0.225
      },
      "kind": "table",
      "text": "Public Housing Authorities matrix with rows for HR, Leased Housing, Capital Projects, etc., and columns for various PHAs.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "data",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "8a73f9f9-e4dd-4e87-b2b5-0c4195684f31",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.7,
        "w": 0.46,
        "x": 0.51,
        "y": 0.225
      },
      "kind": "table",
      "text": "Private property management companies matrix with rows for Org structure, Rent collection, IT, etc., and columns for various PMCOs.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "data",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "c2e72008-9366-45c3-aede-727c73426f89",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.1,
        "w": 0.92,
        "x": 0.04,
        "y": 0.04
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "Benchmarking analysis compared NYCHA to PHAs as well as private property management companies (\"PMCOs\")",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "240e8e2c-9849-4529-a7d7-a9110ce215bd",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [
    {
      "metricRaw": "Functions benchmarked per peer",
      "numberRaw": "12 functions x 6 PHAs",
      "numberKind": "plain",
      "actionTitle": "Benchmarking analysis compared NYCHA to PHAs as well as private property management companies (\"PMCOs\")",
      "calloutText": null,
      "numberScale": null,
      "numberValue": 12,
      "metricFamily": "other",
      "numberCurrency": null
    }
  ],
  "tools": [
    {
      "name": "Action Titles",
      "slug": "action-titles",
      "agent": "Architect",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-1474-7621-ae4c-9aa05edcdf31",
      "evidence": "Title describes benchmark scope and comparators.",
      "confidence": 85
    }
  ],
  "frameworks": [
    {
      "name": "comparison_table",
      "slug": null,
      "matchId": "e29c2549-055f-42dc-a224-9b2a7b4c28f1",
      "evidence": "The slide presents two side-by-side matrices comparing functional coverage across different entities.",
      "confidence": 0.9
    }
  ],
  "arcBeats": [
    {
      "to": 23,
      "from": 14,
      "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87df-e587ebad39a3",
      "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit",
      "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit",
      "beatName": "Problem & Complication",
      "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-problem-complication",
      "evidence": "Lenses to identify opps; '$16B challenges, mutually reinforcing' on p23.",
      "position": 2,
      "confidence": 95,
      "parentBeatName": "Complication",
      "parentBeatSlug": "complication"
    }
  ],
  "loops": [
    {
      "to": 16,
      "from": 14,
      "name": "Mece Breakdown",
      "slug": "40-mece-breakdown",
      "bestFor": "Problem structuring, ensuring completeness, strategic analysis",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e6-ee09643d2eab",
      "evidence": "p14 'lenses to identify opps' + p16 'Four types of opportunities' presented as MECE.",
      "position": 2,
      "objective": "Lay out the lenses & four opportunity types that structure the engagement",
      "structure": "The Whole -> Category A (distinct) -> Category B (distinct) -> Category C (distinct) -> Complete Coverage",
      "confidence": 85,
      "description": "Divide a complex topic into mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive categories"
    }
  ],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}