Time and Activity: Reports
Objective. Produce a scoped attendance or utilisation report for a stakeholder and state the definitions and caveats that travel with the exported number.
This screen answers 'can I get a shareable, repeatable extract of attendance, hours or utilisation for a team and period?' It turns the on-screen views into an output someone can take into a meeting or a payroll reconciliation.
See it in the demo
What this screen answers
A Sales or CSM person opens Reports when the audience is not sitting at the screen: a team lead who wants a weekly extract, a client review, a reconciliation against payroll. It answers 'give me this view as a defined, repeatable report for a chosen scope and period' so the same question can be answered the same way each time without hand-building a spreadsheet.
The task
Decide the audience and the one question the report must answer, then set scope (team or account), period and the measures that belong to that question - not every available column. Produce the report, and keep the definitions attached to it: which denominator, which sources, which exclusions. A good report is reproducible and self-explaining, so the reader does not reinterpret the numbers their own way.
How to read it
An exported figure looks more authoritative than an on-screen one, and that is the trap. The number carries exactly the same caveats it had on the dashboard - same denominator, same coverage gaps, same period basis - but now detached from the view that made them visible. Before a report is treated as an official or payroll-grade figure, confirm the definitions match what the recipient assumes and that the scope and working-day basis are stated on the report itself. A utilisation column is still activity over available hours, not productivity.
Honest limits
A report is a snapshot of a scope and period under a set of definitions; it is not an audited record and does not reconcile itself against payroll or HRIS. Export format, scheduling and exact column availability must be confirmed with product for the customer's deployment. Position reports as the repeatable evidence layer, not as the system of record for pay.
Interpretation check
Exporting a number does not change what it means. A report carries the same denominator and coverage caveats as the dashboard, so state the definitions and scope on the report before anyone treats it as an official figure.
Practical task
In the demo, define one report for a named audience (scope, period, measures) and write the one-line caveat note you would attach: denominator, coverage and that it is not a payroll record.
Self-check
A lead wants to use an exported utilisation figure for a pay discussion. What do you flag?
Utilisation is activity over available hours, not productivity or output, and the figure carries coverage and denominator caveats. It is not a payroll-grade record. Confirm definitions and the system of record first.
Why attach definitions to a report rather than just the numbers?
Once detached from the view, numbers get reinterpreted. Stating denominator, sources, exclusions, scope and period keeps the reader from assuming a different meaning.
What makes a report trustworthy to re-run next week?
A fixed, named scope, period basis and measure set, so the same question is answered the same way. Reproducibility, not column count.
Is an exported figure more authoritative than the on-screen one?
No. It only looks more final. Same caveats apply, now less visible, so they must be written down.
Verified vs demo. Screen is live in the demo at /#/reports; exact controls and figures are SME-validation-pending.