Corpus coverage

319,975 slides

319,974 are described (100%), so the treemap can explain the corpus instead of just counting files.

Total slides
319,975
Described
319,974
Pending
1

Slide type composition

dynamicclickable
Slide type

Showing 319,974 described slides — 100.0% of 319,975 rendered pages

Tile area is proportional to slide count. Click a category to open its subtype map.

all document kinds · all orientations

Slide collection

311,161-311,190 of 319,975

filter-aware
04
Anima Pitch DeckAnima Pitch Deck · anima-pitch-deck
Pitch deck Investor relations Beat · Solution1 hit
05
Anima Pitch DeckAnima Pitch Deck · anima-pitch-deck
Pitch deck Investor relations Beat · Market Size1 hit
06
Anima Pitch DeckAnima Pitch Deck · anima-pitch-deck
Pitch deck Investor relations 1 hit
07
The slide uses a Venn diagram to illustrate the convergence of design and development tools.Anima Pitch Deck · anima-pitch-deck
Pitch deck Investor relations 1 hit
08
Anima Pitch DeckAnima Pitch Deck · anima-pitch-deck
Pitch deck Investor relations 1 hit
09
The slide uses a 2x2 matrix to differentiate between 'Developer-friendly Code' vs 'Image-based Handoff' and 'Marketing Teams' vs 'Product Teams'.Anima Pitch Deck · anima-pitch-deck
Pitch deck Investor relations Beat · Competitive Landscape1 hit
10
Anima Pitch DeckAnima Pitch Deck · anima-pitch-deck
Pitch deck Investor relations Beat · Founders1 hit
11
Anima Pitch DeckAnima Pitch Deck · anima-pitch-deck
Pitch deck Investor relations 1 hit
01
Slide 1
April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational ReviewApril 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations 1 hit
02
Uses a 'What this work IS vs IS NOT' comparison framework to manage stakeholder expectations.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations 1 hit
03
The diagram is a circular Venn-like representation of three strategic priorities.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Situation & Context1 hit
04
April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational ReviewApril 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Situation & Context1 hit
05
April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational ReviewApril 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Situation & Context1 hit
06
The chart uses a waterfall structure to decompose the total per-pupil spend of $17,455.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Problem & ComplicationLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
07
The slide uses a numbered list format to categorize strategic opportunities, each with associated financial impact estimates.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Problem & ComplicationLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
08
The chart uses a combination of a bar chart for school counts and a line chart for student population to highlight the inefficiency of maintaining fixed costs.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Problem & ComplicationLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
09
The chart is a descending bar chart representing school capacity distribution.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Evidence & ProofLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
10
The chart is a horizontal bar chart representing individual schools sorted by utilization percentage.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Evidence & ProofLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
11
The chart uses a horizontal bar chart to compare ratios, with a vertical dashed line indicating the peer average of 16.3.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Evidence & ProofLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
12
Uses external benchmarking to validate financial projections for school consolidation.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Evidence & ProofLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
13
The slide uses a table to illustrate the financial impact of school consolidation.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Evidence & ProofLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
14
The slide uses a flow-like structure to connect savings/liquidation to reinvestment areas.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Evidence & ProofLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
15
April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational ReviewApril 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Beat · Evidence & ProofLoop · Cost Of Inaction1 hit
16
The slide uses a hierarchical tree diagram to decompose the $265m SPED budget.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Loop · Mece Breakdown1 hit
17
The chart is a horizontal bar chart showing classification rates by school. The text highlights the implications of this variability.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Loop · Mece Breakdown1 hit
18
The slide uses a scatter plot to show the relationship between student disability classification rates and free/reduced meal eligibility across Massachusetts districts.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Loop · Mece Breakdown1 hit
19
April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational ReviewApril 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Loop · Mece Breakdown1 hit
20
The table uses a heatmap-style color coding to indicate cost impact, ranging from red (high cost) to green (cost savings).April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Loop · Mece Breakdown1 hit
21
Uses a waterfall-style comparison between current and steady state costs across three distinct scenarios.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Loop · Mece Breakdown1 hit
22
Uses a gap analysis approach to contrast current state vs desired state.April 2015 McKinsey BPS Operational Review · april-2015-mckinsey-bps-operational-review
Deck Investor relations Loop · Mece Breakdown1 hit