ACCTG 521/522 Joint Capstone Project

Required deliverable: A standalone Alteryx Packaged Workbook (including any API keys and any additional static datasets used).

• Submissions should be saved as Alteryx Packaged Workflows so that any external parts of the workflow are saved with working file paths (e.g., external/static datasets, macros, images).
• An Alteryx workflow can be exported as a packaged Workbook by choosing "Options>Export workflow", and saving the file as a *.yxzp file. Teams should confirm that the file extension is *.yxzp and test that the packaged workbook can be loaded and run in a separate folder.
• Macros are not required, but strongly advised as they increase grading on the technical component of your teams's grade.
• Only public/free APIs can be used for this project. Any API keys necessary to run the workflow must be submitted as part of the packaged workflow. If in doubt, please ask the instructor.
• This component of the final project has a 75% weight for ACCTG522 grading and a 25% weight for ACCTG521 grading of this project (note the final project is 30% of total ACCTG521, and 40% of total ACCTG522 Grades).

• As above this component of the final project has a 75% weight for grades in ACCTG522 and a 25% weight for grades in ACCTG521
• For this component ACCTG522 is graded 80% technical mastery of the tool and 20% appropriateness of the data extracted for the analysis. ACCTG 521 is the reverse, with 20% weight on technical mastery of the tool and 80% weight appropriateness of the data extracted for the analysis.
• The technical mastery of the tool is assessed directly from the packaged workflow along with the explanation of the tool in the presentations (see below). At a minimum, the workflow should extract real time data from an API (such as the SEC EDGAR APIs), transforms the raw extracted data into analysis-ready data. This provides evidence of mastery over tools developed for and used directly in class. Macros are not required, but strongly advised as they increase evidence of technical mastery of the tool which helps determine your teams's A522 grade, modification of macros for purposes other than those provided in class provide further evidence of mastery of the tool. Additional tools that are only covered briefly, or not covered at all, will often provide additional evidence of technical mastery of the tool, for example, use of the python integration tool, especially in cases where the python component has been modified for an important reason (i.e., something that cannot be easily achieved in Alteryx and was not provided in class).
• The appropriateness of the data extracted for the analysis is assessed both from the workflow and explanations in the presentation (see below). At a minimum, the data collected is from typical sources (such as financial statements) and provides meaningful analysis of key metrics, such as important financial ratios for the company. Although extending from simple ratios will likely provide evidence of additional appropriate data for analysis, it is not as simple as collecting more data, as the data has to b used for a meaningful analysis. Teams need to make the cae for why the analysis they are performing is incremental, appropriate, and meaningful given the data they have collected. In this setting consider an example such as measuring performance, it would be incremental to other performance metrics such as ROA if it helps us better understand the company (such as a segment or product-specific ROA), appropriate if the discussion is focusing on KYC related to performance (and future performance) and meaningful if the data obtained is an unbiased, low noise, measure of the performance of the segment. Please feel free to ask if you are unsure about a specific metric.

Required deliverable: PowerPoint Slides AND/OR Tableau or PowerBI Risk Dashboard for your company.

• Submissions should be saved in final presentation form and included in a zip with the Alteryx Packaged workflow. Each team is required to submit their zip of all presentation materials including the workflow by 12/3 at 11:59PM.
• Presentation materials are not to be adjusted after submission, if you need to update a slide due to a minor typo, please let the instructor know
• Combined the In Class Presentation and Presentation Deliverable (Slides and/or Dashboards), this component of the final project has a 25% weight for ACCTG522 grading and a 75% weight for ACCTG521 grading of this project (30% of total ACCTG521, and 40% of total ACCTG522 Grades)

• As above (combined with the verbal presentation) this component of the final project has a 25% weight for grades in ACCTG522 and a 75% weight for grades in ACCTG521
• There are two components to the presentation, the presentation of the tool and the presentation of the insight obtained from the analysis.
• The presentation of the tool can be supported either directly using the Alteryx packaged workflow, which can be demonstrated as part of the presentation. Alternatively, key details about the tool could be incorporated into powerpoint.
• The presentation of the insight offered by the tool can be presented either statically using slides (such as powerpoint) or dynamically using a dashboard (e.g., Tableau or PowerBI).
• Dynamic presentations using dashboards work best when there are multiple distinct insights that change between inputs, such as different ratios.

Required deliverable: A 12 minute Presentation to the Full Class

• The topic of the presentation is on articulating how data analytics can support better "knowing" the public company your team is following.
• The concept of "knowing" your company is loosely defined around the general topic areas covered in ACCTG 521, ACCTG 523, and ACCT 526. For example, ACCTG 521 examines risk from an audit perspective, ACCTG 523 covers financial statement analysis and valuation, ACCTG 526 examines important codification issues related to rules about how accounting information is calculated and disclosed. Any or all of these topics can be covered.
• The presentation is a team verbal presentation accompanied by presentation aides including powerpoint and dashboards, teams can also demonstrate their workflow in their presentation. Teams are recommended to use a combination of these aides for their presentation. If you are unsure on what would likely work best for your team, please ask the instructor.
• Static visuals (i.e., those typically displayed in powerpoint) are best suited for scenarios where the analysis is straightforward, or where a specific snapshot is needed for documentation purposes and there are no (or few) dimensions to the data. In contrast, dynamic dashboards excel in environments where flexibility, multi-dimensional exploration and real-time data access are valuable, enhancing the interactivity and depth of the insights.
• Combined the In Class Presentation and Presentation Deliverable (Slides and/or Dashboards), this component of the final project has a 25% weight for grades in ACCTG522 and a 75% weight for grades in ACCTG521.

• As above (combined with presentation materials) this component of the final project has a 25% weight for grades in ACCTG522 and a 75% weight for grades in ACCTG521.
• There is no requirement that all team members speak during the presentation, teams can organize how they share presentation duties (including how the technology is used) how they feel best suits their team's strengths.
• Presentations need to be at 12 mins maximum so that all teams have a chance to present.
• As a rough suggestion, most teams will be better off if they use a very short amount of time to cover the Alteryx model, as I have direct access to it in the submission.
• In the presentation, coverage of the Alteryx workflow should be focused on the extensions made to the workflows, assume that everyone in your audience is familiar with the workflows that were delivered as part of ACCTG522 or 521.
• As a rough estimate, 1-2 minutes of time might be used to display and discuss workflow extensions if the extensions mostly reuse macros or workflows. In contrast, if the workflow is largely developed independently, you will likely shift more time to the discussion of the workflow, and consider talking about the highlights, or major innovations in the workflow. In these cases, I'd still recommend trying to keep the discussion of the tool to around 4-5 mins maximum.
• The bulk of the presentation should be aimed at covering the main talking points about the project, at least 7 to around 11 mins.
• The talking points will vary per group depending on the focus of the solution. Below are a various ideas on material that your group could cover, this list is not comprehensive, and it shouldn't be considered as what has to be covered as we are subject to time constraints and I don't expect them to be relevant to all groups.
• The closest to a required talking point is about how the tool supports better "knowing" the public company your team is following. For context, assume that the audience has an understanding of the four MPAcc courses, and feel free to reference content from those courses. There should be a good way (or ways) to describe the link between the tool and how it helps your team better understand a company.
• Discussion of how the tool could be extended to provide deeper insight is also worth considering when presenting, you can consider the tool as a proto-type rather thn a final product.
• Discussion of where in a process or task the workflow would be used provides useful context, as generally the workflows will not be stand-alone
• Discussion of some of the challenges, and how they were overcome is also something that teams should consider covering in their presentation.
• Discussion of how automated the tool currently is, and any challenges you identified is also worth considering.
• Discussion of how the automated components of the workflow could be used repetitively is another useful discussion point. Consider providing examples of how often your workflow could be used, how easy it is to be modified.
• Discussion of the insight and conclusions drawn from the analysis is an important part of the presentation, but note that it doesn't have to be the final part of your presentation.
• An example of a different conclusion to the presentation could be explaining how your workflow could be expanded upon and/or used in other settings.
• Another example of how the presentation could be concluded is discussion around the trade-off between time spent working on these complex workflows and the pay-off if it was used repetitively.