I have a problem within my data structure/hierarchy.
Within the majority of tabs I have a hierarchy of Unit, Dept, Team which reside on one table - TableCatalogue. There are also corresponding UnitHead, DeptHead and TeamHead fields on this table.
Within another tab I have a IssueUnit, and IssueOwner hierarchy ie each IssueOwner falls into a IssueUnit. IssueUnit and Unit are not the same but would have a large amount of overlap between the two.
Also, most names within the issue owner structure will either be a TeamHead , DeptHead or UnitHead.
We would like to link the second structure to the first. so we can navigate using Unit, Dept and Team.
Therefore I would like to be able to create a join at the most granular level so that people could click on team, dept or unit and be able to drill through the Issue data.
There is no link between the 2 at present. I tried to create a table which combined the risk issue owenr and team head but didn't seem to have great results. I did this by using a left join
Unfortunately, this did not work. In the script there is currently one synthetic field which we find unavoidable. It uses %StartDate and CatalogueId which is used across all the tabs.
I understand this must be extremely difficult to understand without seeing the app but at present I cannot send.
Does anyone have any pointers on how they think this link may be achieved?
Please find attached some script and my attempt at the linkage.
It seems that the obvious relationship would be IssueUnit=Unit, but if this is not the case, which is the logical equivalence between both, IssueOwner=Unit?
If some of the Issue Units don't match with any of the Units, then how the linking of both these units are possible. In that case even if you select all of the Units, the Issues under the non matching Issue Units won't show up, right? Otherwise there should be some other realtion, so that you can bring these non-matching Issue Units under some Unit. This problem is totally dependent on your business. Will be difficult to comment if we don't understand that.
The problem is that a risk issue owner could be a team head, a department head or a unit head. As I replied to Richy Unit and IssueUnit are somewhat similar but not the same, IssueUnit having about 7 entries, and Unit having approx 16. Both are related but are covered differently. They could probably be linked up in some way. Do you think I should try and do this by an excel table possibly?
That will sort out the issue temporarily. But if new Issue Units and Units comes, you will have to update your sheet every time. Instead of creating this relation in an excel sheet, try to integrate it in the existing database from where you are fetching all these details, so that even if new units are added mapping will happen properly.
