Skip to content
FDE BI Evidence Workbenchobserved → compared → decided → scoped
Engagement board Current gold promoted Model codex Packet xlsx-evidence-v2 Identifiers and receipts

TargetArchitecture_Partial.xlsx

8 sheets · compared 2026-07-30T13:19:23.086Z

  1. Source input Original workbook bytes · 8 sheets Source input detail
  2. XLSX.evidence 12 categories accounted for XLSX.evidence detail
  3. Current gold promoted build Current gold detail
  4. Model walk codex Model walk detail
  5. Your decisions 0 of 13 answered Your decisions detail
  6. Scope / SOW Blocked until every finding is answered Scope / SOW detail

The model says

14 findings

10 direct 1 context 3 not found

You say

0 of 13 answered

The gap is the outstanding work. Context-only findings are excluded — they describe the estate rather than propose it.

Management P&L

10 × 4 · 5 formulas · 1 findings cite this sheet

Context only 1

Observations that describe the estate rather than propose work. They never enter scope and need no answer.

Management P&L metric prototype Context only · Management P&L!A1:D10 · Management P&L!B4:B6 +1 No answer needed

How the model read it

This sheet is explicitly a formula-driven illustration rather than part of the authoritative Target Fields register. Current gold observes exact-name measures for Actual Revenue, Actual Net, Budget Net and Net Variance, but not separate measures for Actual Expenses, Budget Revenue or Budget Expenses. Exact DAX for observed measures was unavailable, so semantic equivalence cannot be confirmed.

Are Actual Expenses, Budget Revenue and Budget Expenses required as production measures even though they are absent from the authoritative register?

What are the approved DAX definitions and source for budget values?

Should revenue/expense classification use account-number ranges as in the prototype formulas, or governed AccountType/AccountGroup mappings?

This project defines the next engagement. It does not assert that the target has been implemented.