We have a few financial reports on which we wish to apply a Reporting tree to be able to have the report detailed per Department and Business unit.
When we apply the reporting tree we see that transactions for accounts that are listed in the row definition, but are posted without a Department or Business unit, are excluded from the report. This makes the report incomplete in relation to what we wish to see, which is all transactional data for the listed accounts (even when transactions are posted to main account only, no dimensions added).
Perhaps it is a misunderstanding on our part of the function of the reporting tree but we want the totals for the accounts and use the reporting tree to "slice" the report and be able to show the report for each unit in the reporting tree.
To highlight this, in the below picture we can see how the report includes transactions on main account only when the reporting tree is disabled:
Below is a picture of how the reporting tree is structured:
To summarize my question:
- Am I missing something in the setup or am I misunderstanding the use case for reporting trees?
- Is it possible for the report to show totals for all listed accounts in the row definition and simultaneously be able to apply the reporting tree allowing us to show the report for specific units or does the report only visualize transactions that involve any of the dimensions/units defined in the reporting tree?
Oskar


Report
All responses (
Answers (