Dashboard and Reports

Albumi separates day-to-day triage from analytical reporting. The Dashboard is where you land when you open the app; it answers “what needs my attention right now?”. Reports are where you go when you want to answer a bigger question about the landscape as a whole — health, portfolio positioning, governance effectiveness.

The split is deliberate. A dashboard that tries to be both ends up being mediocre at either: glance-at-it triage gets buried under charts, and studied analytical work gets interrupted by badges. Keeping them separate means each can be good at its own job.

The Dashboard

The Dashboard is a personal surface — scoped to you, not to the workspace. Two cards side by side:

My Work

A prioritised list of items waiting on you. Mixed by type, ranked so the most urgent appears first, capped at the first six (a “View all” link expands the rest). Item types:

• Architecture Change Requests in Draft, Revision, Approved, or Submitted states, scoped to where you are the author, a reviewer, or an implementer.
• Proposals — entity-level drafts authored by you, or proposals where you are the owner being asked to approve.
• Comments flagged as blocking on entities you own, and @mentions in any comment.
• Review session agenda items where you are a participant (higher priority if you are the session chair).
• Rollout implementations assigned to you, prioritised by status (unassigned > overdue > blocked > scheduled).

Each item shows an icon indicating its type, a title, a subtitle (entity name or author + relative timestamp), and a status badge. Clicking navigates to the item.

There are no filters. If something is on the Dashboard, it is because an algorithm decided you should see it; if you want a different cut of the data, Reports is where to go.

Recent Activity

The last ten workspace activity events — create, update, delete, status transition — across all entities. Formatted as “Application ‘CRM’ updated · 2 hours ago”. Informational, not actionable; useful for situational awareness of what your team has been doing since you last checked.

What the Dashboard deliberately is not

• Not a KPI gauge board.
• Not configurable (no widgets to add or remove).
• Not role-differentiated (the same layout for Admin, Contributor, Viewer — content is filtered by what you have access to).
• Not charted. Badges and counts and text only.

A health summary link is in the top-right corner — a shortcut to the Health Report, not an in-dashboard metric.

Reports

The Reports section is where you go for analytical answers. Path: Reports in the sidebar, or /reports by URL. Reports are workspace-scoped and visible to every member of the workspace; there is no per-report permission.

Today, there is one report

Architecture Health is the only report currently shipped. It answers “how healthy is our enterprise architecture across six critical dimensions, and what are the gaps?”

Two more reports are planned

• Application Portfolio — TIME-matrix bubble chart (Functional Fit × Technical Fit, sized by criticality, coloured by Tolerate / Invest / Migrate / Eliminate), and a lifecycle roadmap timeline by organisation.
• Governance Performance — ACR pipeline by status, cycle time from Submit to Implement, session outcomes, activity trend over weeks.

Both are designed and scoped but not yet implemented. The section below focuses on what you can use today.

Architecture Health (in detail)

Question it answers: how healthy is the portfolio across the six dimensions that actually drive enterprise-architecture outcomes, and if there is a problem, which entities need attention?

The overall score

A number from 0 to 100, computed as a weighted average of the six dimensional sub-scores. Grade bands:

• Healthy — score ≥ 80
• Attention — score 60–79
• At Risk — score 40–59
• Critical — score below 40

If your workspace has fewer than ten total entities (applications + integrations + IT components combined), a low-confidence banner appears at the top of the report. The math still runs, but the sample is too small for the result to mean much. The banner will disappear once you have enough data to trust the score.

The six dimensions

Each dimension has a weight and three sub-metrics. A dimension is excluded from the overall score if its underlying data is too sparse to produce a meaningful percentage — for example, Integration Architecture is skipped when the workspace has no integrations. Excluded dimensions are listed in a collapsible section beneath the active ones.

Dimension	Weight	Sub-metrics	What high means
Application Rationalisation	25 %	Active apps % · Apps without TIME debt % · Phase-out apps with an EOL date %	You are retiring legacy and modernising rather than accumulating
Integration Architecture	20 %	Managed (via middleware) % · Documented (with data objects) % · Protocol defined %	Flows are structured, not ad-hoc point-to-point
Information Governance	20 %	Data objects with a System of Record % · Classified % · Mapped to applications %	Data lineage is explicit and owned
Technology Currency	15 %	Components not past EOL % · Components in use % · Known lifecycle %	The tech stack is current and understood
Catalog Trustworthiness	10 %	Entities with an owner % · Apps with criticality set % · Apps with fit assessment %	The catalog has real data, not empty shells
Business Alignment	10 %	Capabilities mapped to apps % · Apps with a capability % · Initiatives linked to apps %	Strategy and portfolio are connected

Drill-down

Every metric is clickable. Clicking one opens an insight page at /reports/insight/{id} showing the entities that contributed negatively to the metric — the “applications without TIME classification”, the “integrations without a data object”, the “capabilities with no realising application”. You see the list, can navigate to any entity, and can decide what to fix first.

Who sees what

Every member of the workspace sees the full Health report and all insight pages. The data is not gated by role because the information is the same information anyone working on the landscape should have.

What is not there yet

The Health Report is MVP. The following are on the roadmap, not available in the current UI:

• Gauge and trend charts. Visual gauges for overall and per-dimension scores, and a trend line showing score over time (requires automated weekly snapshots, also pending).
• PDF export. Producing a static file of the current report for distribution or archiving.
• Public shareable link. Token-based read-only URL for stakeholders outside the workspace.
• Quarterly comparison. Diff between this period’s report and the previous one, with annotations on what moved.
• Executive summary narrative. Auto-generated plain-language summary of what changed and why it matters.

These are known gaps. If any of them is blocking for your use case, it is worth flagging so the roadmap can be re-prioritised.

When to use which

A rough decision rule:

• You want to know what to do right now — Dashboard. Open it, scan My Work, pick an item.
• You want to know how the landscape is doing — Reports → Architecture Health. Read the overall score, scan the six dimensions, drill into whichever is weakest.
• You want to share the state of architecture with leadership — Reports (PDF export and public share are pending; until then, take a screenshot).
• You want to plan a migration or rationalisation initiative — Portfolio Report (pending); until then, filter the application list by TIME classification and lifecycle status directly.
• You want to understand why an ACR took three weeks to approve — Governance Report (pending); until then, the session and ACR history pages expose the raw data.