{
  "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180",
  "docSlug": "62a3ea47159781a7",
  "documentTitle": "Forsyningssektorens Effektiviseringspotentiale",
  "authorId": "McKinsey",
  "authorName": "McKinsey",
  "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting",
  "presentationDate": null,
  "orientation": "landscape",
  "aspectRatio": 1.333,
  "pageNumber": 215,
  "pageCount": 234,
  "prevPage": 214,
  "nextPage": 216,
  "slideType": "sensitivity_analysis",
  "function": "analyze_data",
  "density": "dense",
  "nDataPoints": 30,
  "notes": "The slide compares three models (DEA, SFA, Best-of-two) across two sets of metrics: potential (DKKm) and descriptive statistics of efficiency scores.",
  "elementsJson": [
    "data_table",
    "bullet_list",
    "bar_chart_horizontal"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180/215",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b638-e29283e73180#slide-215",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "callout",
      "text": "DEA-modellen er valgt som den foretrukne model, idet det vurderes at give det mest retvisende skøn for det samlede potentiale i sektoren.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Visual emphasis",
      "toolSlug": "visual-emphasis",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd951-d3ba-7150-b027-77130d5e374e",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.75,
        "w": 0.3,
        "x": 0.65,
        "y": 0.15
      },
      "kind": "list",
      "text": "Summary of sensitivity analysis findings and justification for preferring the DEA model.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bullet",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "8e44c0e2-eb1d-4288-9896-b02d97b3c610",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "metric",
      "text": "Efficiency potential: 116 DKKm",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "primary",
      "toolName": "Quantification",
      "toolSlug": "quantification",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd951-d3ba-7150-b027-79236ef7172b",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.05,
        "w": 0.4,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.95
      },
      "kind": "source-note",
      "text": "KILDE: Data fra Energitilsynets Netvolumenmodel; Team analyse",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "50d19f20-bae7-4970-80fc-f9f6dbd0a3ea",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.75,
        "w": 0.6,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.15
      },
      "kind": "table",
      "text": "Comparison of DEA, SFA, and Best-of-two models across Totex, Potential, and Efficiency scores.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "data",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "daa69087-2120-4517-a5de-fdf22448a16e",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.1,
        "w": 0.9,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.05
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "Følsomhedsanalyse: Anvendelse af best-of-two-model i stedet for DEA-model reducerer potentialet med 116 DKKm",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "d0c61427-7dd4-4aee-8e22-5488e2d658c0",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [
    {
      "metricRaw": "Efficiency potential",
      "numberRaw": "116 DKKm",
      "numberKind": "plain",
      "actionTitle": "Følsomhedsanalyse: Anvendelse af best-of-two-model i stedet for DEA-model reducerer potentialet med 116 DKKm",
      "calloutText": "DEA-modellen er valgt som den foretrukne model, idet det vurderes at give det mest retvisende skøn for det samlede potentiale i sektoren.",
      "numberScale": null,
      "numberValue": 116,
      "metricFamily": "cost_savings",
      "numberCurrency": null
    }
  ],
  "tools": [
    {
      "name": "Waterfall chart",
      "slug": "waterfall-chart",
      "agent": null,
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "18cfbba9-4dbe-495f-a5c0-ef5ec6fc801e",
      "evidence": "Comparison of DEA, SFA, and Best-of-two models across Totex, Potential, and Efficiency scores.",
      "confidence": 0.7
    }
  ],
  "frameworks": [
    {
      "name": "sensitivity-analysis",
      "slug": null,
      "matchId": "5ede6733-565c-4fcb-a10a-37d8cd1d5974",
      "evidence": "The slide explicitly labels itself as a sensitivity analysis (Følsomhedsanalyse) comparing different modeling approaches.",
      "confidence": 1
    }
  ],
  "arcBeats": [],
  "loops": [],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}