全年生产数据与图表看板

A is more faithful to the supplied production data: it preserves Week 1, maintains fixed machine/shift assignments through Week 48, and uses blank-safe average and total formulas for unentered weeks. Its Week 1 KPI formulas correctly calculate 38,880 units, Operator 1 at 4,720, and Machine 3 at 13,300. B fills Weeks 2–48 with unsupported production figures and includes them in its YTD leaderboard, reporting 1,890,588 units. B’s displayed PivotTables also remain filtered to '(All)' separately from the week dropdowns. A nevertheless falls short of full compliance because its sections labelled 'PivotTables' are SUMIFS/RANK/LARGE formula summaries rather than native PivotTables.

B is the more reliable tracker: it preserves the supplied Week 1 data, leaves later weeks ready for actual entries, uses blank-safe average/total formulas, and visibly highlights top and bottom performers. Its formulas support week-range summaries and cumulative YTD output. A instead fills Weeks 2–48 with unsupported production figures and includes them in its 1,890,588-unit YTD/all-week totals; the supplied data supports only 38,880 units. B still falls short of full compliance because its displayed 'PivotTables' are SUMIFS/RANK/LARGE formula summaries rather than native Excel PivotTables.

Both workbooks have the correct two sheets. Each has 432 rows (48 weeks × 9 operators) with consistent machine and shift assignments, correct Week 1 data, and formula-driven Average and Total columns. Both have Start/End (From/To) week data-validation lists, 4 charts, and Week 1 KPI formulas that resolve correctly: 38,880 total units, Operator 1 at 4,720, Machine 3 at 13,300, 4,320 average per operator, and roughly 58.4% Day / 41.6% Night. A's strengths: it uses only the supplied data, its conditional formatting is visible (green top 3, red bottom 3 on both columns), and its dropdowns drive every summary table and chart. However, A's 'PivotTable 1–4' are SUMIFS/LARGE formula tables labelled as PivotTables; no actual PivotTables exist, so an explicitly named Dashboard component is missing. B shows genuine PivotTable output layouts ('Row Labels', 'Sum of Total Output', 'Average of Average Output', 'Grand Total', 'Week #' report filters). These cover operator, machine, shift average, and a sorted YTD leaderboard, alongside the validation lists and dynamic KPI and chart calculations. B's significant flaw is that it invented daily output for weeks 2–48 without disclosure. As a result, its pivots (defaulting to '(All)'), its YTD chart and its leaderboard show fictitious full-year totals rather than Week 1-based figures, and the pivots are not linked to the dropdowns. That data is easy to clear, whereas A would need four PivotTables built from scratch. On balance, B covers the explicit component list more fully, but the margin is modest.

A is stronger on the task's explicit dashboard requirements, but it has real flaws. Submission A: - The Dashboard contains what are evidently real PivotTables, with Excel pivot layout: a "Week #" page filter showing "(All)", "Row Labels", "Sum of Total Output", "Average of Average Output" and "Grand Total". They cover (a) operator output, (b) machine output, (c) average Day/Night output and (d) a YTD leaderboard sorted in descending order. - From/To Week data-validation lists (B4, D4, sourced from Week 1–48) drive the KPI table and chart helper ranges. - The KPI table covers total units, top operator with its output, top machine with its output, average output per operator, and Day % and Night %, all by formula. - It has 4 charts. - The data sheet has exactly the required columns, with AVERAGE/SUM formulas, the correct Week 1 values and fixed machine/shift assignments. - Weaknesses: weeks 2–48 are filled with unlabeled invented numbers. As a result, the YTD chart and leaderboard, and the pivots at their default "(All)" filter, reflect fabricated data rather than Week 1. The pivots are also filtered through their own Week # field, not the validation dropdowns. Conditional formatting cannot be confirmed, because the render shows only columns A–F. Submission B: - It keeps faithfully to the input: Week 1 is populated and weeks 2–48 are left blank for entry. - Conditional formatting is visibly applied (green for top and red for bottom on Average and Total Output). - Its Start/End validation dropdowns drive its summary tables. - The KPI table is complete, and it has 4 charts. - However, its four "PivotTable 1–4" sections are only SUMIFS/RANK/LARGE formula tables labeled as PivotTables. That misses an explicit core requirement. - It also adds helper columns L–O (WkNum/RowTot/DayCnt/WkList) to the data sheet. Overall, A's genuine PivotTables plus its complete KPIs, validation and charts outweigh B's better data fidelity and confirmed conditional formatting.