IBCS Standards 2.0 (draft with tracked changes)

Some Food for Thoughts: What would be the best guidance in terms of color representation for measures, if more than 1 measures are to be displayed in the same visual e.g., Sales & Backlog together? Both has Prior year as well as planned scenarios to be displayed.

"ambiguous" is a negative term. I think "Neutral" is enough to express the use of blue

Although the focus is definitely more on financial reporting, listing out functions might not cover all people. Instead, the use of a more generic terms like "Financial and analytics professionals" could be relatable to all.

Move structural average to this section. Makes more sense. Or maybe as last structural point as the sign average is being added to the arrow, making it more like a special subset.

As IBCS wants to be adopted by ISO, maybe also good to look at ISO standards in this case.

Statistical Mean Symbol (ISO 3534 & ISO 80000) In ISO 3534 (Statistics — Vocabulary and symbols), the average is treated as the mean. Population mean: Typically symbolized by the lowercase Greek letter \(\mu \) (mu).Sample mean: Typically symbolized as \(\overline{x}\) (x-bar), which is the most common notation for a sample average. 

Update dates

Update dates

Suggestion: in all examples positive variances are displayed as desirable (green). From learning perspective it would be beneficial to have an example where a positive variance value is regarded as undesirable.

N/A is more coomonly used abbreviation?

or not applicable? I think you mean this instead of not available

suffix

In the examples give the deltaPL label has been centered on the first variance bar. Based on the text it suggests that the labe should be centered on the axis.

Is positioned not above but on the right handside.

Chart 4 Berling PY is not consistent with the other charts

This sentence is suggestive. It raises the question for the reader which part is adopted and which part not.

or pictograms?

Important to note is to distinguish between nominal and ordinal/interval/ratio.

Nominal data can not be ranked. Where in statistics like a bell chart can only be applied for interval/ratio. Which you can regard time series as well.

In fact if IBCS would rephrase that interval/ratio are being displayed horizontally it would capture it, instead of limiting it to time series, which is in fact an interval.

We never talk with hatching which diagionally is being usen (top-left to bottom-right, or bottom-left to top-right).

Could be a coincidence. I noticed - but this could be pure coincindence - that I draw by hand left-top to bottom-right. But maybe this is because I am left handed.

It is nitty gritty...But Berlin has a popolution almost 2x times bigger than Rome or Paris. So the sales per capita should be the smallest.

"A valid option" or "Suggested"

update to 2026

Shouldn't be more clear : "visual objects" instead of "visuals"?

Proposal for adding another scenario type:
"Trend scenarios" combine actual data with forecast data (Actual + Forecast). This includes actual data integrated with updated plan data, creating a continuous time series that bridges historical performance and future projections.

Proposed comment on SUCCESS wording (IBCS v2.0)
Summary (core recommendation)

To strengthen clarity, internal consistency, and normative precision, the SUCCESS statements should be reformulated in a structurally unified, non-overlapping, and ISO-conform “shall-only” style. This ensures that the SUCCESS acronym applies its own UNIFY principle to itself, thereby improving usability, teachability, and credibility of the standard.

Rationale
1. Internal consistency and credibility

The SUCCESS framework promotes consistency (“Things that mean the same should look the same”). However, the current SUCCESS statements do not follow a uniform grammatical or structural pattern. Aligning their syntax and modality reinforces the standard’s internal coherence and demonstrates methodological integrity.

2. Conceptual clarity and separation of concerns

Some SUCCESS principles partially overlap in scope (e.g., message vs. visualization, simplification vs. condensation, consistency vs. structure). A revised wording improves conceptual separation, making each principle distinct, easier to interpret, and more consistently applicable.

3. ISO-normative language and enforceability

The current wording mixes narrative, advisory, and explanatory styles. Replacing this with a consistent “shall”-based normative formulation:
- reduces ambiguity
- increases legal and auditability robustness
- improves suitability for training, certification, and governance contexts

Proposed “shall-only” SUCCESS wording

SAY — Convey a message
Business communication shall convey a clear and explicit message rather than merely presenting data.

UNIFY — Apply semantic notation
Elements with the same meaning shall be represented consistently to enable reliable pattern recognition.

CONDENSE — Increase information density
All information required to understand the content shall, where feasible, be presented within a single page or view.

CHECK — Ensure visual integrity
Information shall be presented accurately and shall not be distorted by misleading scales, representations, or visual emphasis.

EXPRESS — Choose appropriate visualization
Visualizations shall be selected to communicate both the intended message and the underlying facts clearly and efficiently.

SIMPLIFY — Avoid clutter
Redundant, distracting, or non-informative elements shall be avoided to maintain clarity and focus.

STRUCTURE — Organize content
Content shall follow a logical structure that is consistent, mutually exclusive, and collectively exhaustive.

Expected benefits

This revision would:
- increase clarity and readability of the SUCCESS framework
- improve internal consistency in line with the UNIFY principle
- strengthen normative precision and enforceability
- enhance adoption, training effectiveness, and global applicability
- reinforce IBCS’s position as a methodologically rigorous international standard

Just as a side note: We should probably distinguish the term "dimension" as it is defined here from the "dimensions" as they are used in the context of dimensional modeling in a data warehouse.

Not sure if we want to address this topic here because it could distract the reader from what is important here: It could make sense to relate to the term "data product" here though. I'm aware that there different opinions out there what a data product is all about: The more narrow definition (often used in the data mesh community) is pure data sets. I personally use a wider definition including statistics, reports and dashboards as one type of data products.

Compact “Rule Overview 2.0” for creators

It would be helpful to have:

A consolidated overview: Something similar with the cheat sheet in the notation guidlines

All rules
Brief explanation
Typical errors

Why it is relevant:
Creators do not work with the rules in their daily work, but with checklists.

A small visualization that shows the difference between Notation and Composition (new structure) would be very helpful.

Best Regards
Christian

Test

Replace the sentence, as we (read IBCS) can not speak on behalf of ISO?
Why not more in line with: that there is no standard defined yet to distinguish between these measures. However this could be developed in future releases.

And leave it open if it is ISO or IBCS. By laying it solely at ISO, the position of the IBCS community is partly undermined. As there is no need/wish for the community to be involved anymore, as ISO will take care of it.

Weak example. Looking at the description above the visual, I would find for example the usage of a URL as source footnote much more clear and powerful example than a mere technical identification what type of templateis being used.

omit "projected on the wall", it could also be displayed on a screen for example.

For readability combine stacked column and stacked bars together. as both sentences are equal and feels to me redundant.

replace the sentence by "Seeing and hearing something at the same time improves recall, but texts are not just visual elements—they must be read and understood (see Fig. EX 3.2)"

I have an issue with the wording "must" in this sentence. It makes the sentence very directive, whereas other parts of the document it is about suggestions, proposals, etc. It is not consistent with the document.

The shortening of 2023 towards 23 is not described in previous text. Also the omitting of the whole scenario set. In previous text it is only written when AC is the only scenario you can omit it. Now in the example, I as reader am confronted with something else what is written before. Making the example, not an example of the written text.

If it is indexed unit is not # ?!

I think the remark is already been made. But update the document so it is line with the prublication year. So use 2026 instead of 2018. This gives the reader that there are updates. If I see an old date, I expect there has been no updates in that section.

Nes tales, profit in mEUR. Conflict with redundancy rule/consistent scaling.

Missing currency unit or physical unit, as the start of the section describes that a measure is always accompanied with either one of them.

The description of the content of a page with three lines is adopted in ISO 24896.

Do not weaken your strong points/selling points by using suggestive words.

replace different with specific

Where is the title in figure 2.1.1?

is layout the correct wording? Is it more position, setup, location, ...?

Stronger wording:

For dates it is suggested to use ISO...

As this document is related to ISO standards, I would not undermine ISO by making it a good choice. Instead apply an "ISO unless ..." policy.

Why do we use a different rule set for currencies vs physical units? Why not the same rule set?

suffix? instead of prefix, see next section currencies

Rephrase towards the audience within an organisation? IMHO I believe IBCS is not restricted to higher management, but also applies to local reporting for a departemental manager or even an operator. For these target groups it would be better to have native notations.

to be replaced by: is recommended for international organisations