Refresh a driver-based forecast and scenarios

Why use this

1. Rolling a forecast forward can hide errors where actuals replace estimates and formulas extend into new periods. Scenario labels are also unhelpful when the assumptions that distinguish them are scattered across cells or overwritten during updates.

2. This job could make the model change reviewable through an actuals cutoff and assumption log. Finance owners can inspect driver effects and spreadsheet consistency before relying on scenario outputs.

Why an agent / simpler alternative

Useful judgment

Reconcile model structure with incoming actuals and explain driver changes across scenarios.

Simpler alternative

Use an established import and formula-fill process when the model is stable and changes are mechanical.

Unsuitable when

The source model is undocumented or the user expects an assured financial projection without review.

Proposed inputs

1. Name

   Existing forecast model

   Owner

   Finance owner

   Minimum scope

   Approved workbook, scenario definitions and current period structure

   Quality check

   Identify protected formulas, named ranges and model ownership.

2. Name

   Closed actuals and driver assumptions

   Owner

   Finance owner

   Minimum scope

   Authorized period exports, mapping rules and approved scenario inputs

   Quality check

   Confirm the close status, units, currency and actuals cutoff.

Access and setup — proposed or unknown

Proposed minimum

1. Work on a versioned model copy and preserve a baseline before refreshing values or formulas.

Compatibility unknowns

1. Unknown: Finance plugin access, NetSuite export mapping and spreadsheet-engine compatibility.

External actions requiring approval

1. Replacing shared forecasts, transmitting financial records or distributing decision materials.

Expected deliverable and review checks

Proposed artifact

Updated model copy with scenario outputs, formula checks and an assumptions-and-changes memo.

Critical checks

1. Closed actuals reconcile to the approved export and do not overwrite forecast formulas beyond the cutoff.

2. Scenario differences trace to explicit drivers rather than hidden manual plugs.

Missing output evidence

No new workflow run or output inspection is performed for this editorial layer. The linked implementation evidence retains the original source-specific outcome and artifact limits.

Failure signals and proposed responses

1. Signal

   A formula extension shifts a reference to the wrong historical period.

   Why it matters

   The forecast may look plausible while using an incorrect driver base.

   Proposed response

   Inspect representative formulas and reconcile expected dependencies against the baseline.

2. Signal

   A scenario assumption is changed only on one output tab.

   Why it matters

   The model can show inconsistent versions of the same scenario.

   Proposed response

   Centralize the approved driver and trace all dependent outputs before review.

Effort and cost — unknown

Setup work

1. Map actuals, document drivers and define model integrity checks.

Ongoing review

1. Review variances and update assumptions with owner approval at each refresh.

Unknowns

1. Unknown: data-access costs, recalculation support and finance-review workload.

First check — proposed, unexecuted

Status

proposed_unexecuted

Synthetic fixture

A synthetic model includes a closed-period actual, a formula with a shifted reference and inconsistent scenario growth inputs.

Acceptance checks

1. The actuals cutoff stays fixed.

2. Both formula and assumption inconsistencies are flagged before interpreting scenario results.

Stop conditions

1. Missing assumptions must be invented or the shared authoritative model would be overwritten.

Limits

1. Scenario outputs are conditional estimates; a refreshed model does not establish forecast accuracy or future business performance.