This case tests the candidate's ability to balance quantitative analysis with qualitative judgment and pushback against client assumptions. The core challenge is recognizing that while headline rent savings appear significant ($740k annually), once implementation costs and lease breakage are factored in, the deal becomes cash-negative over the CEO's stated 2-year timeframe—requiring candidates to challenge the CEO's premise and introduce strategic benefits (talent acquisition, hiring competitiveness) from market data to justify the move anyway.