#Reports & Dashboards토론 중인 항목 111개

So the Contect record is only connected the the Account via the standard Account Name:  Lookup(Account) field.  There is no Lookup(Agency) field on the Contact Object?   

If that's the case, then you're gonna have to use a Joined Report, a singular Custom Report Type won't cut it 

@Elizabeth Bumgarner

the screenshot is very helpful, but can you provide some context as to how things are working in the workbook?  

For example, is there a join of actual data (actual admissions) to the forecast data?  Or how is that being produced/handled?   

Can you provide just the calculations being used for the

for each measure (1) No. of Admissions (2) Upper Prediction (3) Lower Prediction.   

Are there filters or parameters being used here as well? 

If you can provide these answers, that may give others some additional context for a possible solution; especially, for a situation whereby we won't be able to have the actual workbook. 

Not sure that I'll be able to respond with a solution, but the added info. may help.

Hi Abby, since it works from "View All" but not from the related list, the issue is most likely the related list action rather than your data. From your screenshot, the Choose Price Book window is reappearing, which is a good clue. Things to check: 

1) Open the Quote and confirm the Price Book field is still populated. If the picker keeps showing, the related list may not be reading it. 

2) Check for validation rules or required fields on Quote or Quote Line Item that could be failing without showing an error. 

3) Try an incognito window or another browser, and clear your cache to rule out a cached Lightning component. 

4) If the Quote page uses a Dynamic Related List, re-add the Add Products action or switch back to the standard related list. 

It's also worth searching the Salesforce Known Issues site for "Quote Add Products" in case this came with a recent release. Hope this helps!

Hi Narender, had a look at all four. Mostly small things, and the chart types are generally fine.  

Viz 1. Bars are right for comparing rates. Some of the 100% bars (Undefined under No Deposit, and several of the Refundable ones) are probably very few bookings, but they look as important as Online TA. Add the booking count to the tooltip or label (n=12 style), or filter out segments under a minimum. Also City Hotel and Resort Hotel are sorted differently, so it's hard to compare the same segment across the two. Use one fixed order.  

Viz 2. Careful with seasonality here. This dataset covers arrivals from July 2015 to August 2017, so July and August appear three times and every other month only twice. Adding up all years makes the summer peak bigger than it really is. Use one full year (2016) or show average bookings per month per year. The orange bars are labelled "Count of Is Canceled" in the legend, which reads like cancellations, so rename that to Bookings. And for the channel / customer type part of your question, filters only show one at a time. Small multiples, one small chart per channel, would answer "does the pattern differ" much better.  

Viz 3. The title is the same as viz 1, I think it should say country. A diverging palette suggests there is a meaningful middle, so either centre it on the overall cancellation rate (then orange/blue means below/above average) or use a sequential palette. Countries with only a handful of bookings get the strongest colours, same issue as viz 1, so a minimum bookings filter helps. Portugal is by far the biggest origin in this data and probably deserves its own callout. I'd also remove the Latitude/Longitude (generated) and parking space filters, readers won't use them.  

Viz 4. I couldn't tell what each bubble is without hovering, so label them or use shape for the other dimension. Average days on the waiting list is close to zero for most of the bubbles, because most bookings never wait at all. "% of bookings that waited" would show much more. Bubble size for 0.28 to 1.15 special requests is hard to read, and this one is trying to answer four things at once, so I would split it in two.  

Labels: only the highs/lows or the marks you talk about in the text. Tooltips don't look overloaded to me.