Field Integrity
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Hi!
I've built a workflow that compares a set of financials from multiple companies, each in a separate column, and then adds and subtracts these columns based on a manual list I review before each run. There are two main parameters: include and exclude. The columns that are "excluded" are not just excluded, though; they are subtracted from the "included" columns because they actually roll up into the "included" column on our financials. It's confusing, but that's just how our financials work. Unfortunately, occasionally the financials and company codes and names change. When that happens, and I feed it updated financials and an updated "include/exclude" list to compare it against, I have to go in and double-check that tools (Join, Select, etc.) are indeed checking the correct company fields, which usually requires several changes. Is there a way to make this workflow more dynamic so that when it is fed updated company fields, I don't have to double-check all the tools to ensure it's working correctly?
I've attached two dummy workflows to illustrate my problem: Workflow 1 will have no changes, and everything will work as it should. Workflow 2 will contain an updated company code (2060 - Solar Corp -> 2050 - Solar Corp), and you can see how this change causes problems in various tools throughout the workflow.
This is the only workflow I've built, so I apologize if the workflow is clunky and my question seems silly.
This workflow also contains a macro from Crew Macros that totals both across and down.
Thank you!
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Labels:
- Datasets
- Developer Tools
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Hi @ry123x
I've had a look at this for you, and while attempting to make it more dynamic i've kinda rebuilt the whole workflow, and simplified it considerably for you.I got a bit confused around the multiple unions/joins with just headers etc so apologies!
Given your use case this should work, the pivotal part is Transposing your data into columns, so it doesn't matter what the field is called.
If you change the 2060 to 2050 it still brings through the right values.
I've attached the workflow for you to look at, and use if you wish!
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Your Workflow is brilliant! I've gone through and compared your workflow against mine step-by-step and yours makes so much more sense. I don't know what I was thinking! I need to go back and do some more weekly challenges.
Thank you, David!
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
You’re very welcome!
