Please see the SyWay Analytics Approach document, section 'Documentation' for more information about the context of this document.
It is to be populated by the story owner and the reporting functional consultant collaboratively.
It does NOT describe business logic e.g. KPI definitions delivered by the data models (e.g. analytic models) that it consumes. This is covered in the Data Model Functional Specification
If a requirement is for a flat table, then this will be delivered as a story and this document may simply show the order of the columns. Where more detailed requirements for a story layout are known, this template will capture these requirements.
As story building is an iterative and agile process, it is expected that this document will be updated through the development process.
| Status | |
|---|---|
| Functional Specification Owner | PRAZERES-ext, ines |
| Stakeholders | Aurélien Vermeillet, Helena Macieira |
| Jira Request ID | |
| Jira Development (Build) ID | |
| Lean IX App Link | To be added when development reaches UAT |
| Business Process Reference (L4) | 11.11.01.02. Create & Distribute Custom Reports |
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Application System (Delivery Tool) | SuccessFactors – Story Report Module: PMGM - Calibration |
Calibration Report
Story report
The Calibration Story Report is required to analyze calibration sessions and support governance of performance calibration activities across the organization.
This report will help ensure:
This report enables HR and Talent stakeholders to monitor and validate calibration practices, identify gaps or inconsistencies, and ensure alignment with group‑wide calibration standards.
There is no report in the current catalog that meets these needs so a new report needs to be created.
This report only requires Successfactors (SF) data, so SF reporting tools are the best approach.
SAP standard templates were considered but none meets the requirements, the request is too complex for the existing templates. So a custom report will be created.
Content ownership: PRAZERES-ext, ines
Input from: Aurélien Vermeillet
This merged report is intended to replace the two separate catalog requests and deliver a consistent, comprehensive view of calibration activities.
Only Active users.
Excluded Non-Cadre (i.e., only Cadre should be included) (to exclude the non cadres we can use Workforce Category field or Pay grade)
1.Summary KPIs: Headcount, Total Nr of Calibration sessions, Nr of Managers, Nr of Direct reports
2.Nr of Calibration Sessions per several dimensions
3.Average Rating per several dimensions
Calibration Session ID,Session Name, Employee User ID, Employee first and last name, Employee Email, Manager user ID, Manager first and last name, Manager Email, location, gender, Talent flags, Entity, grades, regions, job function, country, site, department, calibration session start date, Calibration session end date, Calibration Rating
location, gender, Talent flags, grades, regions, job function, country, site, department, calibration session start date, Calibration session end date, Calibration Session ID, Calibration Session template, Manager, Entity LT N-1 (Allow to select the indirect reports → HR want to be able to see the direct reports and indirect reports of Managers)
Details on the way we can filter to have data on the direct and indirect Reports:
1.On the data source we need to have the Manager and Manager +1 selected. Manager+1 is the Manager of the Manager.
2.Then there are 2 options to have as filter:
a) Add Manager and Manager of the Manager as filters:
→ If we have these filters, they will act as an AND relationship, meaning we cannot apply both at the same time, otherwise we will get no data.
What we must do is to either apply the Manager filter (and see the direct reports of these manager), or apply the Manager of the Manager (and see the Indirect Reports of the Manager).
→ what we will not be able to see, is see simultaneously the direct and indirect reports of a Manager.
b) Add an Advanced filter with and OR condition as follows:
This will allow us to see the direct and indirect reports of a Manager simultaneously.
→ However, there is no possibility of selecting all users (i.e, not selecting any particular manager), which means that if we apply this filter the HRs will have to know to come to this filter and select a Manager otherwise they will not see any data displaying.
Report should be in this format:
→ In order to allow HRs to see all data and also to see the Direct Reports and Indirect Reports of Managers, we propose the following:
Provide a high‑level overview of calibration execution and outcomes across the organization.
| Report Field Name | Mandatory / Optional | Prompt Type | Default Value / Restriction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Location | Optional | Selection | All |
| Department | Optional | Selection | All |
| GBU | Optional | Selection | All |
| Function | Optional | Selection | All |
| Manager | Optional | Hierarchy | User‑selected |
| Manager +1 | Optional | Hierarchy | User‑selected |
| Calibration Session Date | Optional | Interval | All |
| Widget | Data Model | Field | Filter |
|---|---|---|---|
| Summary KPIs | PMGM Calibration Model | Headcount, Session Count | Active, Cadre only |
| Sessions by Dimension | PMGM Calibration Model | GBU, Function | User‑selected |
| Average Rating | PMGM Calibration Model | Calibration Rating | User‑selected |
This section will contain a wire-frame of the page indicating the widgets on it. The wire-frame can be a draw-io diagram or a screenshot of e.g. an excel mock-up.
If there are multiple data models in the story, indicate which data models the widget takes data from at page or widget level.
Widget level details such as filters, dimensions, hierarchy usage, history, comparatives, targets, thresholds, top N etc can also be included. N.B. This level of detail is not mandatory and often changes through the iterative development process. For tables, indicate the number of expected rows.
Provide detailed, employee‑level and session‑level calibration data for audit and analysis.
Calibration Detail Table – Expected Columns
| Report Field Name | Mandatory / Optional | Prompt Type | Default Value / Restriction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Employee Status | Mandatory | Selection | Active only |
| Cadre Indicator | Mandatory | Selection | Cadre employees only |
| Manager Hierarchy | Optional | Hierarchy | User‑selected |
Content ownership: PRAZERES-ext, ines
Input from: Aurélien Vermeillet
A custom story report is required as no existing standard or catalog report meets the complexity of calibration analysis needs. The design consolidates two catalog requests into a single, consistent reporting solution.
N.B. Unless this is a planning story, the testing should cover layout and user experience NOT data values for metrics created in the data model. Data model values will be tested in conjunction with the data model specification.
The developer will need to test repeatedly, so where appropriate provide instructions to reverse the actions performed so the test may be run again, or explain how to create new input data to the test. In particular, the developer will need logons for test users representing the various roles within the approval process.
| ID | Condition | Expected Result |
|---|---|---|
| TC‑01 | Apply Manager filter | Direct reports displayed |
| TC‑02 | Apply Manager+1 filter | Indirect reports displayed |
| TC‑03 | Apply OR filter | Direct + indirect reports displayed |
| TC‑04 | No manager selected | HR sees all calibration data |
List any considerations essential for application test planning (e.g., test this before ABC along with DEF separate from GHI). If the development encompasses a user interface, explain how to test it. List any insights as to how this component could be tested the most efficiently.
Description of requirements not covered by topics above
