Hichert Partner Logo

Follow @ibcs_a

Comments since 2015-07-01

Jürgen Faisst 2017-03-25 07:44 pm 0
UN 4.2 Unify time series analyses
Hi Beat,
I think you have to show all the years if you use "..". 
If you want to show the average over the four years from 2013 to 2016 I would suggest to use 2013_2016Ø. 
Jürgen Faisst 2017-03-25 11:46 am 0
UN 4.1 Unify scenario analyses
I would prefer a sequence representing the actuality of the scenarios from left to right:

2016 PY is in fact from 2015 and therefore the oldest one
2016 PL has been created end of 2015, which is before 2016 really started to happen
2016 FC is created while 2016 happens
2016 AC is the documentation of what has happened in 2016 after it happened

However, different views on this are exactly the reason why "No rule governs the sequence of scenarios referring to the identical time period".
Yvan Clot-Goudard 2017-03-22 01:21 pm 0
Thanks for clarifying, Jörg, point noted.
Joerg Decker 2017-03-21 08:52 pm 1
I would like to post your question to the LinkedIn Forum where you already posted another question. This place here is to discuss the standard and its changes. The LinkedIn Form is the place where all consultants meet and (hopefully) help quickly.
Jürgen Faisst 2017-03-21 12:31 pm 0
UN 4.2 Unify time series analyses

Rolf and I suggest to complete this section by adding a symbol for year-to-go in analogy to year-to-date: 


Year-to-go analyses (YTG) refer to the period from the present to the end of the (fiscal) year (YTG time span). Where helpful, visualize analyses showing YTG values by appending an underscore to the time period name, e.g. “Jun-2015_”.


Yvan Clot-Goudard 2017-03-20 01:28 pm 0
Great work! This is very helpful implementing proper structure to various reports.
I can see a few flaws however, which I would like to highlight:

1) The Acronym SUCCESS is memorable, but I don't think it is accurate as it is not STRUCTURED. It should be
Yes SSESCCU is not an acronym anymore, but it conveys the right information in terms of flow.

2) I have occurrences of charts on same pages that shows progression of data, some of them fluctuating very little (e.g. 99.8%, 99.7%, 99.9%) and other data fluctuating widely (e.g. 20%, 40%, 75%), How to show the same scale on a single page with such differences of variations.

Arne-Kristian Schulz 2017-03-09 05:49 pm 0
CO 2 Utilize space Reduce-empty-space

Actually I do think that white space is a very comfortable and useful thing - it just allows us/designers of reports to organize information on a page in a way that the readers' eyes are directed to the information of interest quickly.

We do have two guiding principles of how to attract the readers' attention - one is to work with correctly sized deviation charts (e.g. red color attracts us, the largest bar is one that catches our attention quickly), the second is to apply a very clean layout which uses white space wisely from a design perspective. In the end, having some white space gives us a lot of flexibility when it comes to applying responsive design. Pretty soon there will not be much space left if you have to transfer reports to an iPad or even a smartphone screen.  

In most cases however, I do think that adding data and comparisons is delivering a lot of value to the customer and thus should be the first attempt to convince him/her how to use white space wisely ;)

Jürgen Faisst 2017-03-08 12:18 pm 0
CH 5 Show data adjustments Introduction
Jan - I think you are completely right. Quite frankly, we needed a second rule in order to have at least two rules in this section and 14 rules in the CHECK chapter for symmetry reasons on the poster :-). 

Any idea for other "data adjustments" worth being visualized but not based on a point-anchor? What about manual corrections? 
Jürgen Faisst 2017-03-08 12:07 pm 0
CH 4 Use the same scales Use-outlier-indicators-if-necessary
I think the reason for this controversial discussion is, that Alex, Lars, Raphael, and Tilo talk about interactive analytic systems (where you never know what numbers will pop up), whereas Rolf comes from the design of static reports. So let's talk about interactive analytic systems:

I agree, that all the situations can occur as described. However, following Raphael, I would not cut bars with absolute values exceeding a threshold automatically and by default. The default for absolute values should be "proper scaling". Instead, I would propose an interactive functionality allowing to change the proper scaling by manually adding a threshold in order to better visually analyze the smaller values. However, this interactive functionality has more the character of "zooming into small values" than of "marking outliers". So I would suggest to propose such a functionality as part of CH 4.5 "Use magnifying glasses" and to use a different visualization for the truncated bars in this case. Then we can stick to using outlier indicators only to indicate big relative variances of small values. 
Jürgen Faisst 2017-03-08 11:32 am 0
CH 4 Use the same scales Use-scaling-indicators-if-necessary
Picture for CH 4.3: I also vote for changing the picture - not only, because the similarity to CH 4.1 might be misleading, but also because I think, that "Sales" and "Profit" on one page should always be scaled identically in order to visually perceive the "Profit on sales". I would prefer an example, where a chart on country level is on the same page as a chart with the European totals.  

Sequence of rules:
I would not want to change the order of the rules in CH 4. I think that CH 4.2 is even closer related to CH 4.1 than CH 4.3, because CH 4.2 gives us a hint on how to stick to identical scales: Size charts to given data. I would only apply scaling indicators (CH 4.3) if I failed in adapting the chart sizes (CH 4.2). 
© 2017 IBCS Association. Licensed under Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 International.