全年生产数据与图表看板

Both preserve the Week 1 daily inputs and all 432 operator-week assignments. A has correct cached calculations and populated operator, machine, shift and sorted YTD summaries: 38,880 total units, Operator 1 at 4,720, and Machine 3 at 13,300. Its validated week endpoints support period selection, and its ranking formulas handle ties without duplicating operators. B’s four sections labelled “PivotTable” are SUMIFS/INDEX formula grids rather than the requested PivotTables; its LARGE/MATCH leaderboard can repeat an operator when totals tie. A is therefore stronger, but its rendered data pages show Err:507 despite valid-looking Excel structured formulas and error-free caches, preventing confirmation of full completion.

B more closely matches the requested dashboard. Both preserve the Week 1 inputs and fixed assignments across 48 weeks. B provides correctly populated operator, machine, shift and ranked YTD summaries, week/scope filter rows, and validated week endpoints: total output is 38,880 units and Machine 3 leads with 13,300. A’s sections labeled PivotTables are ordinary SUMIFS/RANK formula grids instead. However, A calculates correctly in the supplied renders, while B’s Average/Total Output columns show Err:507 despite correct cached values, leaving B’s Excel recalculation uncertain.

Submission B is the more reliable, working dashboard. Neither submission fully meets the task. A has better scope coverage, but its core calculated columns are broken in the render; B misses native PivotTables. **Submission A** - Strengths: A has more of the requested pieces. It has native PivotTables with correct cached values (Operator 1 = 4720; machines 12935/12645/13300; Day/Night 908.6/808.25; sorted YTD leaderboard). It also has start/end week data-validation lists, 4 charts and a dynamic KPI block. - Core problem: the Average Output, Total Output and Days Entered columns use a shorthand structured-reference form, `[@[Monday Output]:[Friday Output]]`, with no table name. This is not the 2007-style form Excel writes to files. - Visible failure: the rendered data sheet shows Err:507 in every Average Output and Total Output cell, including Week 1. As a result, no top/bottom highlighting is visible. - Knock-on effect: the dashboard KPIs, chart helper ranges and the Included/Excluded pivot-scope flags all read from these columns (WeeklyTotals, WeeklyAverages, DaysEntered). Only cached values survive, so the 48-week tracker risks a repair prompt or non-calculating cells in Excel. **Submission B** - Data sheet: B uses plain formulas, e.g. `=IF(COUNT(E2:I2)=0,"",AVERAGE(E2:I2))`. These render correctly (944.0 / 4,720, etc.). - Conditional formatting: green top-3 and red bottom-3 highlighting is clearly visible on both Average Output and Total Output. - Data setup: Week 1 data matches the input, and machine/shift assignments are fixed for all 48 weeks. - Week selection: Start/End dropdowns (D4/H4) use a Week 1–48 list, and the summary tables respond to them. - Week 1 KPI formulas give correct results: 38,880 total; Operator 1 at 4,720; Machine 3 at 13,300; 4,320 average per operator; Day 58.4% / Night 41.6%. - It has 4 charts. - Weakness: the four "PivotTables" are SUMIFS/LARGE formula tables labelled as PivotTables, not native PivotTables. That is an explicit requirement miss, though they deliver the requested insights (operator, machine, shift average, YTD leaderboard).

Submission A wins because its core tracker works, while Submission B's required calculated columns render as errors. **Submission A** - **Data sheet:** It is correct and works. - There are 432 rows covering Weeks 1–48 for Operators 1–9, with fixed machine and shift assignments. - Week 1 matches the input exactly. - Average Output and Total Output use valid formulas (=IF(COUNT(E2:I2)=0,"",AVERAGE/SUM(...))). - The rendered page shows correct values: 944.0/4,720, 815.0/4,075 and so on. - Conditional formatting is visible: green on the top three (Operators 1, 5 and 9) and red on the bottom three (Operators 2, 4 and 8). - **Dashboard:** - Start-week and end-week dropdowns at D4 and H4 list Week 1–48. - Four tables (operator, machine, average shift output, YTD leaderboard) are driven by SUMIFS on those selections. - There are 4 charts. - A fixed Week 1 KPI table covers total units, top operator and output, top machine and output, average per operator, and day/night percentage share. - The formula logic checks out: top machine resolves to Machine 3 (13,300), and Day/Night totals are 22,715 / 16,165. - **Main gap:** The "PivotTables" are formula tables labelled as PivotTables, not native PivotTables. **Submission B** - **Strengths:** It is more ambitious. - It appears to have native PivotTables filtered by an Included/Excluded helper column, which require a manual refresh. - It has dropdowns at B4 and D4, input validation, and KPIs for the selected period. - **Critical defect:** Average Output and Total Output use unqualified structured references such as `[@[Monday Output]:[Friday Output]]`. - Every rendered page shows `Err:507` in both columns for all rows, including Week 1. - As a result, the required auto-calculations and the top/bottom highlighting cannot be seen. - The Dashboard's named ranges (WeeklyTotals, WeeklyAverages, DaysEntered) all point to these broken columns, so the KPIs and charts would inherit the errors. - This syntax (`@` and no table name) is also a known cause of Excel's file-repair prompt, which would leave the tracker without working calculations. - **Net:** B's native pivots do not outweigh visibly broken required calculations. A's deliverable is correct and usable for weekly meetings; B's core data layer fails as rendered.