How do you group base members without a new hierarchy?

[OSAdmin]

Originally posted by Felipe Alcorta

In our previous consolidation/reporting tool (Tm1/IBM), we always had the ability to group certain members together without having to create a hierarchy.  We could group them manually by picking them or grouping them based on a particular attribute.  Can OS do anything similar?  For example, if I want to group members 1, 2, 3, and 4 but they have different parents, I'm trying to replicate the XFGetCell (1+2+3+4) functionality so that I just pull a single grouped member.

TIA

[OSAdmin]

Originally posted by Colin ONeill

We do that using the UD dimensions.

UD1 = location (e.g., Houston)

UD4 = brand (e.g., brand1)

The following locations are brand1, in the Location Text6 field.

Houston, Phoenix, Tampa

The following locations are brand2, in the Location Text6 field.

Seattle, Portland, Las Vegas

The UD4 dimension looks to the the Location Text6 field to determine brand.

REPORTING

We can report on the UD4 Dimension to group Houston, Phoenix, Tampa without referring to the Location dimension hierarchy.

For example, U4#brand1 : A#Sales 

[OSAdmin]

Originally posted by Felipe Alcorta

Thanks.  I'd really not want to create a separate dimension for this.  Any other ways?

[OSAdmin]

Originally posted by Ben Novak

populate the text# field of those base members with a common value and use the member expansion where(text_ contains ____). see example below where this will return all base branches that contain the word 'budget' in the text2 field property of each base branch member

u2#branches_all.base.where(text2 contains Budget)

[OSAdmin]

Originally posted by Felipe Alcorta

Thanks!  I feel like almost all the way there.  That does what I need in identifying the members that have text2 = XYZ.  However, rather than return several instances (where there is "Budget" as text2) by using the equation you specified (I used QV), I want those members grouped together into one cell.