

- Description
- Tableau de bord d'un petit avion : cadrans et écran de navigation à lire d'un coup d'œil, au-dessus d'un ciel de crépuscule.
- Source
- Aryaazma · original page
- Licence
- CC0 Public domain
Visualization and UX
This theme evaluates the report's ability to make things understood quickly and without error: choice of visuals, information hierarchy, navigation (bookmarks, tooltips, drill-through pages)…
In short
This theme evaluates the report's ability to make things understood quickly and without error: choice of visuals, information hierarchy, navigation (bookmarks, tooltips, drill-through pages), consistency (JSON theme, template), cognitive load, usability testing. We assess substance (principles, decisions, evidence), not visual polish. Accessibility and multilingual support are covered separately: ACC.
Level: 🟢→🔴 · Theme code: VIZ
1. Why this theme#
An accurate number presented poorly is misread; a misleading chart (truncated axis, 12-slice pie chart, dual axis) leads to bad decisions. A 30-page report “showing everything” is only consulted by its author. Cost of ignoring this: low adoption, data extraction requests, multiplication of parallel reports (GOV).
2. What this theme measures#
- Axis: from an accumulation of default visuals to a designed, tested, and consistent experience.
- Key indicators: time to answer 3 standard questions (usability test), number of clicks to reach information, page usage rate, template compliance.
- Units: seconds, clicks, % of compliant pages.
3. The 5 levels#
| Level | Short name | Promise | Typical indicator (orders of magnitude) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Default | Numbers are displayed; the reader has to guess where to look. | Default visuals, 15+ visuals per page |
| 2 | Shared template | All team reports look alike; the reader finds familiar cues. | Shared JSON theme; 1 template |
| 3 | Readable journey | A new user answers their 3 main questions in under one minute. | Usability test: < 60 s for 3 questions |
| 4 | Design system | The report is consistent, documented, and reusable; a new screen is built in hours, not days. | Component library; design review at each delivery |
| 5 | Measured adaptive | The experience adjusts to roles and devices, and design decisions are based on measured usage. | Usage telemetry used; mobile validated |
4. Milestones by level#
| ID | Milestone | Verifiable evidence |
|---|---|---|
| BI-VIZ-1.1 | Each page has a clear title and each visual has a title | Page-by-page review |
| BI-VIZ-1.2 | Numbers have a unit and format (thousands, %, currency) | Formats set on measures |
| BI-VIZ-1.3 | No visual is obviously misleading (truncated axes without mention) | Critical review |
| BI-VIZ-2.1 | A shared JSON theme (colors, fonts, sizes) | Theme file in repository |
| BI-VIZ-2.2 | Page template (header, filters, content area) | .pbit model / standard page |
| BI-VIZ-2.3 | Visual types chosen based on the question (comparison, trend, distribution, relationship) | Internal selection table |
| BI-VIZ-2.4 | No more than ~10 to 15 visuals per page | Review + PRF |
| BI-VIZ-3.1 | Visual hierarchy: key indicator at top left, detail below | Mockup review |
| BI-VIZ-3.2 | Consistent navigation (page menu, back, bookmarks) | Journey tested |
| BI-VIZ-3.3 | Mockups validated with a user before development | Mockup + report |
| BI-VIZ-3.4 | Reserved semantic colors (red/green for variances, never decorative) | Color guidelines |
| BI-VIZ-3.5 | Page tooltips and drill-through pages for detail without overload | “Drill-through” pages in use |
| BI-VIZ-4.1 | Documented component library (KPI cards, headers, matrix templates) | Component repository |
| BI-VIZ-4.2 | Systematic design review at each delivery | Completed review checklist |
| BI-VIZ-4.3 | Custom visuals limited and approved (security, performance, support) | Visual whitelist |
| BI-VIZ-4.4 | Timed usability test on 3 questions per major report | Test report |
| BI-VIZ-5.1 | Usage telemetry (page views, filters, drop-offs) used to make decisions | Quarterly usage review |
| BI-VIZ-5.2 | Mobile variant designed and tested | Mobile layout verified |
| BI-VIZ-5.3 | Journeys adapted to roles (executive / manager / field) | Pages or reports by role |
| BI-VIZ-5.4 | Systematic removal of little-used pages | Removal log |
5. Detailed reading by level#
🟢 Level 1 — Default#
- Signs: default visuals, technical titles (“Sum of Amount”), random colors.
- Benefit: speed. Does not guarantee: understanding.
- Difficulty: 1/5 · Effort: 1/5.
🟢 Level 2 — Shared template#
- Signs: shared JSON theme and template, consistent number formats, visual types chosen logically (bars for comparison, lines for trends).
- Benefit: consistency and production speed.
- Limit: consistency does not imply relevance.
- Difficulty: 2/5 · Effort: 2/5.
🟡 Level 3 — Readable journey#
- Signs: design starts from user questions, not available data. One page = one message. Details are in tooltips or drill-through, not overload.
- Benefit: adoption; fewer extraction requests.
SFA common thread: the “Field coverage” page answers “are my visits being completed?” (completion rate vs target, by week); customer drill-through is available via drill-through, not shown by default.
- Limit: validated by few people.
- Difficulty: 3/5 · Effort: 3/5.
Symptom: users ask for “an Excel export of the table.” Cause: the matrix does not answer the real question, or it is too dense. Remedy: investigate how the export is used, and make drill-through natural rather than banning export.
🟡 Level 4 — Design system#
- Signs: reusable components, tightly controlled custom visuals, timed usability testing, design review.
- Benefit: consistency at scale, easier training.
- Limit: system maintenance cost.
- Difficulty: 4/5 · Effort: 4/5.
🔴 Level 5 — Measured adaptive#
- Signs: telemetry (service activity logs) feeds design decisions; mobile and role-based versions; regular cleanup of dead pages.
- Benefit: the report evolves with real usage.
- Limit: privacy compliance in telemetry (RLS, PD — security).
- Difficulty: 5/5 · Effort: 4/5.
Ask “what decision does this page enable?”. A page with no associated decision is a candidate for removal.
To keep a theme under control, version the JSON theme in a repository and apply it through the PBIP project (IND); colors “hard-coded” in a visual are technical debt to track down.
Copilot/assistants can suggest a layout and titles; they reproduce clichés (pie chart, gauge) and do not test anything with a real user.
6. Partial achievement and rating#
Common rule. “A partial 5”: telemetry reviewed but not yet used to remove pages (BI-VIZ-5.1 = 0.5; 5.4 = 0), mobile designed for only one report (5.2 = 0.5), roles half covered (5.3 = 0.5).
7. Moving to the next level#
Possible means (optional):
| Transition | Possible levers |
|---|---|
| 1 → 2 | JSON theme; template; formatting rules |
| 2 → 3 | Mockup workshops; 3-question test; drill-through |
| 3 → 4 | Component library; review checklist; visual whitelist |
| 4 → 5 | Activity logs used; mobile; role-based journeys |
Pitfalls:
- False positive: a nice-looking report never tested with a user.
- Goodhart: “< 10 visuals per page” leads to multiplying pages; judge the journey, not the count.
- A design system that constrains too much: allow justified exceptions.
8. See also#
- Related themes: ACC · PRF · GOV · DAX
- Other matrices: PD — Adoption and Change Management · PI — Stakeholders and Communication (PAR)
- Content: Cross-Cutting Power BI Best Practices · Power BI Reporting Project Checklists · OneLake + SaaS Mobile Apps: Overview
✻ Written by Claude Sonnet 5.5