{
  "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": 326,
  "pageCount": 482,
  "prevPage": 325,
  "nextPage": 327,
  "slideType": "appendix_methodology",
  "function": "present_framework",
  "density": "sparse",
  "nDataPoints": 0,
  "notes": "The slide uses a comparison matrix structure to contrast two analytical approaches.",
  "elementsJson": [
    "comparison_table"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc/326",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b634-e5735b54e9cc#slide-326",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.75,
        "w": 0.9,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.18
      },
      "kind": "framework",
      "text": "Comparison matrix of two analytical approaches",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "instance",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "bfa2d418-fdd5-4751-a666-c677fab40e53",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.6,
        "w": 0.15,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.25
      },
      "kind": "list",
      "text": "Formål, Metode, Udbytte, Opmærksomhedspunkter",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bullet",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "1a291abf-5316-4294-a698-c153a19a63e5",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.05,
        "w": 0.9,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.08
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "Analysen er gennemført ved to komplementerende tilgange",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "19e7360a-04cc-428c-83a4-9f35a42f8e59",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [],
  "tools": [
    {
      "name": "Comparison frame",
      "slug": "comparison-frame",
      "agent": null,
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "09d6904e-197b-4ff8-80db-a9ff202db657",
      "evidence": "The slide compares two analytical approaches.",
      "confidence": 0.7
    }
  ],
  "frameworks": [
    {
      "name": "matrix-nxn",
      "slug": null,
      "matchId": "731a4d90-ee16-4194-992b-80fb033fa461",
      "evidence": "The slide uses a grid structure to compare two distinct methodologies across four dimensions (Formål, Metode, Udbytte, Opmærksomhedspunkter).",
      "confidence": 0.9
    }
  ],
  "arcBeats": [
    {
      "to": 420,
      "from": 322,
      "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-2a66536a5837",
      "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit",
      "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit",
      "beatName": "Evidence & Proof",
      "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof",
      "evidence": "Admin fællesskaber + nyordning af logistik + insourcing benchmarks and business cases.",
      "position": 4,
      "confidence": 92,
      "parentBeatName": "Evidence",
      "parentBeatSlug": "evidence"
    },
    {
      "to": 365,
      "from": 166,
      "beatId": "019dd95a-0702-74a3-87da-37e90642ab06",
      "arcName": "The Triple Take",
      "arcSlug": "triple-take",
      "beatName": "The Implications (So What)",
      "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-implications-so-what",
      "evidence": "Potentialeestimater, benchmark gaps, comparison tables.",
      "position": 2,
      "confidence": 70,
      "parentBeatName": "Reflection",
      "parentBeatSlug": "reflection"
    }
  ],
  "loops": [
    {
      "to": 365,
      "from": 322,
      "name": "Scenario Fork",
      "slug": "35-scenario-fork",
      "bestFor": "Strategic planning, risk analysis, board presentations",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-088b-72c8-b7e2-6e9175aa6c84",
      "evidence": "5 designkriterier -> 4 konkrete modeller (page 334-336) -> recommendation + 14 mio. kr. kursusadm.",
      "position": 11,
      "objective": "Compare four models for administrative faellesskaber plus kursusadministration",
      "structure": "The Decision Point -> Scenario A (If X) -> Scenario B (If Y) -> Scenario C (If Z) -> Recommendation",
      "confidence": 86,
      "description": "Present multiple futures based on different assumptions or decisions"
    }
  ],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}