1.05-08 Use Composite lists rather than ragged

rob_marshall

Composite lists are more flexible and calculate more efficiently so try and "balance" the hierarchies whenever possible

 

Exception:

• 1.05-08a Chart of Accounts, or financial reporting hierarchies: Chart of Accounts, financial reporting hierarchies are valid uses of non-composite lists

rtpeterson22127

rob_marshall

@rtpeterson22127

Sure....99% of the time, a P&L list should be set up as a ragged list, with the different levels within the list because data coming in is usually at the bottom level. Also, a user does not enter data at the parent levels of a P&L like Total Expenses or Total Revenues. That number is calculated from the bottom up.

When you set up the CoA as a composite list, you have to balance it out which creates needless levels to aggregate as well as it makes it more difficult for the end users to navigate the hierarchy.

Hope this helps,

Rob

rtpeterson22127

rtpeterson22127

rob_marshall

@rtpeterson22127

I can't really comment on 1 and 2 as I am not sure what they are doing, but if you are using a P&L list, 99% of the time it should be a ragged list for the following reasons:

• Data loaded from the source system at the lowest level, not an aggregated level
• End users input their data at the lowest level and then that data gets aggregated up. I have not seen a use case where end users enter data at the Total Revenue or Total Expense or the Net Income (all aggregated levels of the CoA).
• It is much cleaner for the end users for the list to be ragged, it makes more sense to them
• With the added levels of a composite hierarchy (balanced), you are introducing more calculations that are "empty" (just the aggregation of one member).

In your current model, let's say your CoA is 6 levels deep...How many modules do you have that are dimensioned by levels 1 through 5? And if you do have modules dimensionalized by levels 1 through 4, what are they doing?

Just because there is a Planual rule that says you shouldn't do it, that doesn't mean you HAVE to follow it 100% of the time. Let the data tell you what you should do.

LethargicAnalyst

@BrittoMJ