RELATED IDEAS
Allow for Fiscal Year date formats to be customized to read FY16 Q1 vs 2015/16 Q1
No description provided
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- +3
10
MERGED
Timeline reports need accurate fiscal year display, and/or option to switch to calendar year
Right now, you identify the month that a fiscal year starts, but not the fiscal year offset. For example, our fiscal starts Oct, and we are now (Oct 31 16) in Q1 FY2017.
The problem here is that a timeline view showing a release (for example) in ...
0
Shipped
6
MERGED
Reports to support Quarters for non-calendar Fiscal years
Case Ref: Pivot table named “Pivot table: Product releases by quarter” is displaying pervious year within the Quarter column title
Change Request:
Support non-calendar fiscal years: When the display option is selected as Quarters, both the year...
1
Shipped
Can you please provide a roadmap update for this feature request?
Your support team has suggested 'manual adjustments' as an option. Colleagues are pushing back on Aha! reporting. The justified value is automation. Manually updating every report is (obviously) not efficient.
As a 5 year old idea, is this still "future consideration"? We get considerable confusion from stakeholders that are used to a "FY21Q1" convention.
I agree with the other comments. The confusion this has caused on our customer roadmap has required us to add a legend to our roadmaps explaining the quarterly labels.
Agreed. We have a split fiscal year and the date presentation generates unnecessary discussion.
Echo the comments above. There has been lots of confusion around these dates, which ultimately has led to a ton of questions coming to the PM team and taking up a lot of unnecessary time.
Same issue for our organization - we use a F19Q1 type convention. We love that we can align the Fiscal Year to our calendar, but like first comment notes it drives confusion.
Definitely custom - our FY runs Aug to July and having custom fields would be required
This would be really awesome. EVERYONE (with no exaggeration) who has seen these dates has been confused and gone off into a tangent as to why it makes no sense.
My personal suggestion would be to allow us to set a 'Fiscal year prefix', so that we could select 'FY', but another company might have a different convention, or show nothing at all. Your UX people may well have a better solution. :)