Forum Discussion

kbon's avatar
kbon
New Contributor
3 years ago

OrgByperiod/ Restructuration d'entités

hello team,

new in OS , i need help if someone works on this tool.
i am wondering if there is an equivalence of the hfm functionality "org by period" in OS ?
is it possible in OS to manage the structure on a “Time sensitive” basis, and to have effective dates for changes ? i am aware that it's possible to do the changes of % of ownership or even change of type of ownership (full Conso, equity...) by period but am wondering if it will be possible if a change of the parent of the entity and having two hierarchies existing on the same cube/app

thank you in advance

Metadata
Methodology
Time
  • Krishna's avatar
    Krishna
    8 months ago

    TomABC - I think I found the solution. Here we go.

    1. If you have 2 Cube Summary and Base Cube.

    2. Set the Org By Period in the Summary Cube Settings.

    3. Add the Relationship in the Entity Dimension that is tagged to the summary Cube.

    4. Update the Consolidation% in the Entity Dimension that is tagged to the Summary Cube Relationship property.

    5. In the Base Cube Entity Dimension the relationship property can be 100% consol.

     

     

  • shikhak's avatar
    shikhak
    New Contributor
    3 years ago

    Hi LeeBown and TomABC,

    The description you provided on Org by period was very helpful to me. 

    I undertand that this is the basic functionality of OS when below options are selected in 'Consolidation Algorithm Type' 

    We have a case that, we have to write some custom rules in OS specific to client. So we have to selet 'Custom' in the Consolidation Algorithm type. Now our problem is that Org by period is not working at all. We were able to eliminate the data rollup for inactive entities by setting Consolidation % and Ownership % to be '0'. But the interncompany data still gets eliminated at the parent where the entity is inactive. 

    Have you had any similar experience. Do you have any idea how to handle this? 

    Thanks!

    Shikha

  • TomABC's avatar
    TomABC
    Contributor II
    3 years ago

    Yes, OneStream is capable of handling Org by Period applications...

    • Krishna's avatar
      Krishna
      Valued Contributor
      8 months ago

      Hi TomABC  - Thanks for the information. It was helpful. I have a quick question; The Houston Entity will be shared is that correct? so it will exist in both the places and under the old parent the % set to 0 and new will be 100% based on time period.

      • TomABC's avatar
        TomABC
        Contributor II
        8 months ago

        That's correct if Houston Entity is moving to a new parent in the new period

  • LeeB's avatar
    LeeB
    Contributor II
    3 years ago

    Hi, 

    To the best of my understanding "Org By Period" is usually approached in a couple of ways. 

     

    1. The neccessary parent/child relationships can be represented within the current Entity reporting structure.  So, if any entity is moving division in Period 3, you can set to 0% consolidation and add a relationship for the entity under it's new parent at 100% consolidation.  This results in a single entity hiearchy, which is quite efficient but it may confuse users since the base entities will appear until multiple parents.  I don't believe there is a way to hide the inactive relationships.

    Reporting is also impacted since there is no standard way of recording that a relationship between a parent and a child entity is inactive.  This means a member filter such as E#Division.Base would return all active and inactive entities.  As a result, custom member lists are deployed but these don't typically work on all filter expansions and as such your reporting options become limited.  It also means the standard Drill-down functionality in the system doesn't quite work as expected to the extent where if an entity in no longer consolidating into it's parent because it has moved it will still display in the Drill down results.  

    Other considerations with this approach are the fact that custom consolidation and eliminations rules are often needed. 

     

    2. The second approach, which I'm sure you are familiar with, is to create an alternate hiearchy outside the current entity reporting structure.

     

    Lee