Analytics Discovery Workshop

Problems this addresses

An analytics discovery workshop is for the meeting where the numbers do not match. Finance has a close figure, revenue has a pipeline figure, and both are labeled in a way that sounds final. The session finds the conflict, names an owner, and picks a first slice small enough to build.

It is not a report design marathon and not a tool selection theater. You should leave knowing which metric is in dispute, which systems it touches, and what 'good' means for the first view.

Two reports, one label

Bookings, revenue, and pipeline get used as if they were synonyms. The workshop writes the sentence that separates them, with the owner who can defend it. Until that sentence exists, a new dashboard adds a third version.

Filters change the total and nobody meant them to

A region cut, a product cut, or a date cut silently drops rows. We reproduce the meeting's filter on the current report and see what moves. That is often the whole dispute.

The source of the number is a person

If the only reconciliation is someone who 'just knows', the process stops when they are out. Discovery names the system the total should match and the person who owns the definition after that.

The first dashboard tries to answer everything

A kitchen-sink report never ties. We pick one meeting, one figure, and the cuts that meeting already uses. Other requests go on a list with a reason they are later.

Hypothetical example. The weekly revenue meeting shows CRM bookings and finance shows recognized revenue, both called revenue. In this hypothetical, a credit memo is in one and not the other, and the gap is blamed on 'the data'. Discovery writes the two definitions, shows one week side by side, and chooses which view the meeting will open first. The build, if you want one, starts there.

What you leave with

You leave with the conflict in writing, a first slice, and the inputs a later build would need. The workshop does not pretend to be the build.

A metric note

The figures in dispute, what each includes, and who owns the sentence. Disagreements that are not resolved are labeled unresolved, not smoothed over.

The systems behind that note

Ledger, CRM, billing, or the workbook that is still the real source. Enough to scope a connection, not an inventory of every application you own.

A first slice

The meeting, the figure, and the cuts. What will be checked against the source. What is out of the first view on purpose.

A recommendation you can reject

Whether the next step is a Power BI model, a definition change only, or a Free Assessment to scope the build. You choose.

What a Free Assessment covers

Discovery can be the Free Assessment when the question is already this narrow. If you need a wider sequence across AI and several functions, the roadmap workshop is the better first session.

Bring the two reports that disagree and the people who defend them. We follow up within 2 business days if you would rather start with a written assessment than a working session.

FAQs

Is this only for Power BI?

No. The conflict is usually a definition. Power BI, Fabric, or another tool comes up only if it is how you will publish the slice. The workshop does not start from a product.

Will you design the whole dashboard in the room?

We sketch the first view so people can react. Visual design of a full pack is delivery work, after the metric note is accepted.

What if we cannot agree on the definition?

Then that is the outcome. The note says who still disagrees and what the meeting will use temporarily. We do not pick a formula to make the workshop look finished.

How is this different from the roadmap workshop?

Discovery stays on reporting pain and the first analytics slice. The roadmap sequences a broader list, including whether AI is ready. Use discovery when the argument is already a number.