Currently, the start date on the portfolio item scorecard is only useful if the start date is less than 1 year in the past.and end date is less than 5 years in the future. If the start/end dates on the portfolio item extend beyond these bounds, the backend logic forces the start/end dates on the scorecard for the portfolio item to 1 year in the past (start date) and 5 years in the future (end date). This makes the portfolio item burnup on the scorecard entirely useless, and this dictatorial logic is hidden from users. If the burnup start date is out of sync with the actual start date, the burnup graph is useless and shows an incomprehensible burnup ideal line.

IMO, it's a poor assumption that all portfolio items will take less than a year to complete, and it's inconsistent with the 5 year end date...with that logic, a portfolio item can take max 6 years to complete, but the scorecard would only show useful burnup for 1 year, after which the burnup slope will be corrupted.

I propose to remove this logic so the start/end dates are the ACTUAL start/end dates as entered on the portfolio item. This would make the scorecard on portfolio items that take a long time to complete useful.

by: Jason A. | about a month ago | Reporting & Analytics