场景 061 · Codex Use Case

准备业务复盘

整合 KPI、结账工作簿、指标定义、预测、此前复盘和负责人说明,解释重要变化、异常、风险、数据问题与跟进。

DataIntegrations
Prepare a business reviewDataIntegrations

原文核对:2026-10-13 · 中文正文 · 英文提示词与演示

场景定位

整合 KPI、结账工作簿、指标定义、预测、此前复盘和负责人说明,解释重要变化、异常、风险、数据问题与跟进。

难度
中级
时间跨度
30 分钟

适合用于

  • 产品、运营、增长或财务的周/月/季度复盘。
  • 汇集仪表盘、工作簿、预测和负责人说明的审阅。
  • 管理层审阅前需为重要数字追溯来源的团队。

相关工具

Documents

创建带管理层结构和来源注释的可编辑文档。

Spreadsheets

核验结账和预测数据,追溯到源工作表。

Google Drive

读取指定 Drive 文件或文件夹的获准材料。

Google Drive ↗
Slack

读取获准财务结账会话和负责人背景。

Slack ↗

起步提示词

英文原文 · 可复制后按实际材料修改

Use $documents and $spreadsheets to prepare the [weekly, monthly, or quarterly] business review for [business or team].

Use the KPI dashboard, metric definitions, close workbook, revenue and expense tables, forecast update, prior review, and owner notes I provide. If any inputs are in connected plugins, use only the exact @google-drive files or @slack threads I name.

Create an editable document with a short leadership summary, material KPI changes, key variances, anomalies, changes since forecast, risks, data-quality checks, review questions, and follow-ups by owner. Include supporting charts where useful. Cite the workbook tab, dashboard, or source note behind every material number. Do not fill gaps with invented figures; list unsupported claims and missing inputs for review.

依据周期复盘记录

复盘应解释变化、原因和待决策事项。结合仪表盘、定义、结账、预测、此前复盘及负责人说明起草,并保留来源链。

准备来源

指定文件、仪表盘和对话,说明周期、受众、重要性阈值、此前预测和必需章节。使用受控来源集,避免泛搜工作区。

  1. 定义周期、受众与重要性阈值。
  2. 上传 KPI、定义、工作簿、预测、旧复盘和说明。
  3. 起草前检查数据质量并追溯重要数字。
  4. 审阅变化、差异、异常、风险、假设和跟进。
  5. 进入管理层讨论前确认来源链接和负责人行动。

审阅叙述

区分有依据结论与待负责人回答的问题,指出重要 KPI 及相对预测变化,清晰说明风险,并便于指派跟进。

官方提示词

英文原文 · 可复制后按实际材料修改

Compare this business review with the prior review and audit the narrative.

Show:

- newly material KPI changes and variances
- anomalies that resolved or worsened
- risks and owner follow-ups that remain open
- metrics whose definitions or sources changed
- unsupported claims or data-quality issues
- questions the team should ask next

Cite the source behind every material comparison, flag uncertainty, and keep unresolved items grouped by owner.
展开英文原文对照

Give ChatGPT KPI dashboards, close workbooks, metric definitions, forecast updates, prior reviews, and owner notes, then ask it to explain material changes, variances, anomalies, risks, data-quality issues, and follow-ups in a review-ready narrative.

Build from the recurring review record

A business review should explain what changed, why it changed, and what the team needs to decide. ChatGPT can assemble the first draft from KPI dashboards, metric definitions, close workbooks, forecast updates, prior reviews, and owner notes while keeping the source trail visible.

Prepare the review sources

Name the exact files, dashboards, and conversations ChatGPT should use. Include the reporting period, audience, materiality thresholds, prior forecast, and any required sections. Avoid broad searches across a connected workspace when the review should rely on a controlled set of approved inputs.

  1. Define the review period, audience, and materiality threshold.
  2. Attach the KPI dashboard, metric definitions, relevant workbooks, forecast update, prior review, and owner notes.
  3. Ask ChatGPT to check data quality and trace material numbers before drafting.
  4. Run the starter prompt and review changes, variances, anomalies, risks, assumptions, and follow-ups.
  5. Confirm the source links and owner actions before the review enters leadership discussion.

Review the narrative

A useful draft separates supported conclusions from questions that still need an owner. It should call out material KPI movement and changes since forecast, explain risks in plain language, and make follow-ups easy to assign.

官方提示词

英文原文 · 可复制后按实际材料修改

Compare this business review with the prior review and audit the narrative.

Show:

- newly material KPI changes and variances
- anomalies that resolved or worsened
- risks and owner follow-ups that remain open
- metrics whose definitions or sources changed
- unsupported claims or data-quality issues
- questions the team should ask next

Cite the source behind every material comparison, flag uncertainty, and keep unresolved items grouped by owner.