General Purpose Financial Reporting Support for XBRL

“Paper is just an object that information has been sprayed onto in the past.” Ted Nelson

Think about something.  What if someone desired to use XBRL-based reporting but they are not mandated to report to some regulator like the SEC, FDIC, or ESMA; then what "profile" of XBRL would they use? What if there was a "general profile" for working with XBRL that could, say, be used internally within a business for consolidation, internally for cost accounting, for creating benchmarking systems, for sharing information with peer organizations, and other such use cases.

Well, the Seattle Method is such an application profile for general XBRL-based reporting that does not need to meet some arbitrary regulator reporting regime.  While the Seattle Method cannot be called an industry de facto standard (yet); the Seattle Method inspired the creation of the Standard Business Report Model (SBRM) by OMG.  The Standard Business Report Model is a logical conceptualization of a business report that is independent of any technical syntax.

In the early days of XBRL-based reporting, software vendors would commonly build support for only one specific XBRL taxonomy and for reporting to one specific regulator.  Now that there are numerous regulators making use of XBRL, software vendors are realizing that that is not the best idea.  Today, software that only supported XBRL-based reporting to the SEC has been modified to also enable XBRL-based reporting using the ESEF to ESMA.

Perhaps it is appropriate that individual regulators to sometimes create their own proprietary application profile of XBRL; it is always necessary?  What if there was one global standard universal digital financial reporting framework?  A universal general purpose reporting framework and each regulator creating their own specific application profile are not mutually exclusive.

Here are a handful (my GOLDEN VERSIONS) of XBRL-based reporting schemes that I have created, all are compliant to the Seattle Method, and all should be supported (could be supported) by XBRL-based reporting software applications: (form more information see START HERE)

  1. Accounting Equation
  2. SFAC 6
  3. SFAC 8
  4. Common Elements of Financial Report (Four Statement Model), Version 1
  5. Common Elements of Financial Report (Four Statement Model), Version 2
  6. Common Elements of Financial Report (Four Statement Model), Version 3
  7. Essence
  8. MINI Financial Reporting Scheme
  9. MINI Financial Reporting Scheme with Business Events and Classic Transactions
  10. PROOF Financial Reporting Scheme | Repository of Reports
  11. XASB Financial Reporting Scheme
  12. AASB 1060 Financial Reporting Scheme (Prototype)
  13. Not for Profit Financial Reporting Scheme in US (Prototype)
  14. School District Accounting Manual (SDAM), Washington, State (Prototype)
  15. Primary Financial Statements for IFRS (Prototype)
  16. Lipsum (Prototype)
Each of the XBRL-based taxonomies and XBRL instances provided within those prototypes is of ultra-high quality, heavily tested, guaranteed to be consistent with the XBRL technical specification, and follows the Seattle Method framework or "application profile".  Any off-the-shelf software application that says it supports XBRL will be able  to work with the XBRL taxonomies and XBRL instances for each of the 9 prototypes.  You can use the above XBRL taxonomies and XBRL instances as benchmarks to access software capabilities and functionality.  In addition, that off-the-shelf software should have no trouble with this conformance suite.

Here are four more complex examples; these are accounting workpapers, auditing working papers and schedules, and financial analysis models:

TESTING: You can use these IMPORT FILES and DOCUMENTATION for testing, benchmarking, reverse engineering, etc.

Each of the 9 prototypes above are supported by and heavily tested using the following XBRL software applications currently:
If any software wants their software tested to be sure if follows the spirit of the Seattle Method or wants to understand the OMG Standard Business Report Model (SBRM) better, please do not hesitate to contact me on LinkedIn or send me an email.


Additional resources:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS)

Image
Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS) is an interesting idea that combines the relational paradigm and the knowledge graph paradigm.  This documentation, Why RKGS , explains the idea. This gets even more interesting with the notion of "relational AI".  RelationalAI is described as follows by the company of the same name, Relational.ai : “RelationalAI is a cloud-based relational knowledge graph management system, with state of the art probabilistic processing and declarative reasoning at scale to make developing Data Applications a superpower for your business.” This notion of knowledge graphs represented in relational databases fits into my belief that knowledge graphs have two aspects: the expression SYNTAX and the logic of what is expressed or SEMANTICS. While the LOGIC of a knowledge graph is always the same regardless of technical syntax used to express that logic; there are many, many different technical syntaxes that can be used to represent a knowledge graph. There
Read more

Getting Started with Auditchain Luca

Image
(Note that a newer, production version as opposed to only the development version , of Luca Suite is available) The Innovator's Dilemma points out that disruptive innovations often look like toys that are doing everything wrong. Auditchain Luca , which is part of the Auditchain Suite , is a unique approach to creating a knowledge graph .  To experience using Auditchain Luca, have a look at the Getting Started with Auditchain Luca instructions. Be sure to grab the Excel and JSON import files used for this getting started exercise.   This getting started exercise uses one of several different approaches to getting information into a tool for constructing and viewing professional quality knowledge graphs .  Additional getting started guides will be made available over time. Auditchain Luca might not make sense to you if you don't understand the paradigm shift that is occurring and if you have not shifted your mental map. For the next step in your journey, consider trying creat
Read more

Evaluating the Quality of XBRL-based Financial Reports

Image
From the time public companies started submitting XBRL-based financial reports to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, I have been looking at those reports, trying to understand the XBRL-based reports, and trying to figure out how to get them right.  That information was used to figure out how to create software applications that help professional accountants get these reports right. Here is information that summarizes my testing and results which I stopped doing March 31, 2019: Analysis of the high level accounting relationships in the 10-Ks of about 5,716 financial reports  (5,063 public companies, about 89.1% got all these high level accounting relationships consistent with expectation, 623 were inconsistent and manual confirmation revealed the inconsistency was an error) Documentation that helps you understand 26 different types of errors in XBRL-based reports High quality documentation of hundreds of errors in XBRL-based reports submitted by public companies to the SEC Doc
Read more