Real integrity audit example

See what this polished dashboard could make leadership get wrong.

One real Marketing Channel Dashboard audit. See the visible evidence, the integrity findings, the executive interpretation each issue could distort, and what should be fixed first.

Request a Private Walkthrough See the Audit Method

The software is the proprietary audit engine. The value is the decision risk it makes visible.

Annotated Marketing Channel Dashboard with numbered violations, a top-ten legend, and integrity, design, and combined scores

Actual audit result

Strong design can still hide material integrity risk.

The dashboard looks polished, but executive trust requires more than visual quality. The audit tests whether important numbers are sufficiently contextualized, consistently presented, and safe to interpret quickly.

Integrity

66% D

Context, meaning, and consistency issues carry the largest risk.

Design

87% B

The dashboard is visually organized and largely readable.

Combined

73% C

The integrity findings pull down an otherwise strong visual result.

8 fail 7 warning 35 pass 42 not applicable

Proprietary audit method

See how 77 Rules turns visible evidence into an integrity finding.

Follow one real Marketing Channel Dashboard from annotated evidence through ranked findings, severity, heatmaps, and category drilldowns. The workflow exists to support a defensible finding, not merely a score.

Use the speed control, pause anytime, or move one screen at a time.

Step 1 of 6

Establish the audit record.

Preserve the original dashboard, annotated evidence, completed findings, and re-audit history in one review record.

Audit evidenceOriginal and annotated views, prior results, report output, and re-audit history remain connected to the review.

Step 2 of 6

Locate the risk.

See the highest-priority findings marked directly where they occur and compare the most consequential issues at a glance.

Audit evidenceFailures, warnings, rule markers, and ranked findings are tied directly to the audited dashboard.

Step 3 of 6

Separate design from integrity.

Integrity, design, and combined scores show whether a polished dashboard is also safe to interpret quickly.

Audit evidenceSeparate scores expose whether the material weakness is visual quality, analytical integrity, or both.

Step 4 of 6

See where risk clusters.

Scan the heatmap to see where findings concentrate and where the dashboard is already strong.

Audit evidenceGrouped checks make recurring weaknesses visible across structure, encoding, labels, layout, context, and filters.

Step 5 of 6

Examine context and meaning.

Inspect the integrity checks that determine whether leadership has enough context to interpret the chart correctly.

Audit evidenceContext and meaning checks show individual pass, fail, and warning status with supporting evidence.

Step 6 of 6

Review disclosure and filter integrity.

Review disclosure, labeling, and filter-integrity findings without reading the full report first.

Audit evidenceBonus integrity checks isolate unit scaling, category consistency, disclosure, and filter-integrity concerns.

Speed

1 / 6

Actual ranked findings

Each finding connects evidence to the decision it could distort.

These are three high-priority findings documented in the audit evidence. The important question is not merely which rule failed, but what leadership may infer from the chart and what evidence makes that inference unsafe.

Rule 77: Fail

Add comparative context.

Six prominent KPI cards show absolute values without immediate baselines, targets, or trend indicators. Leadership sees the current number without enough context to judge whether performance is improving, deteriorating, or missing plan.

Why it mattersGross revenue, total orders, new customers, margin, ad spend, and acquisition cost are difficult to interpret without knowing whether each number is improving, deteriorating, or missing its target.

FixAdd comparisons such as versus previous period, versus target, or a compact trend indicator to each prominent KPI.

Rule 78: Fail

Add a clear time range.

The dashboard includes an “All Years” filter, but it does not clearly state the period covered by the KPI cards or Revenue by Channel chart. A viewer may assume a reporting window or comparison period that the dashboard never actually discloses.

Why it mattersA reader cannot tell whether the values represent year to date, the last 30 days, a quarter, or another reporting window.

FixAdd a specific time range to the title or subtitle, such as Year to Date, Last 30 Days, or Q3 2023.

Rule 86: Fail

Standardize monetary units.

Cost of Acquisition displays $128.418 while Gross Revenue and Total Ad Spend use $163.6M and $29.3M. Inconsistent scale conventions increase the chance of misreading magnitude during a fast executive review.

Why it mattersMixed scaling makes the units ambiguous and forces the reader to infer whether the acquisition-cost value is dollars, thousands, or millions.

FixUse consistent K or M suffixes where appropriate, or display all monetary values in full.

After the audit

Preserve the evidence, remediate the risk, and create an audit trail.

A 77 Rules engagement preserves the review loop from evidence through remediation: validate context, document the finding, correct the risk, and re-audit the dashboard.

Review evidence

Open the ranked findings or use the heatmap and category views to inspect the full result.

Dismiss a finding

Remove a finding from consideration when the visible evidence does not apply to the dashboard’s actual context.

Export the PDF

Use the PDF action to preserve and share the completed audit output.

Re-audit

Upload the corrected dashboard and run the audit again to see what improved.

Watch a full review

See why visual polish and executive trust are different tests.

The video shows how a dashboard can look strong on design while still containing integrity issues that deserve review before leadership relies on it.

Tableau Keynote Dashboard Review
Design score: 97%. Integrity score: 79%.

What to watch for

Visual polish and dashboard integrity are different tests.

How the audit separates design quality from integrity risk.
How findings are tied to visible dashboard evidence.
How corrections are prioritized instead of delivered as a generic design critique.

What would 77 Rules find in the dashboard your executives already trust?

Bring one real dashboard or board-deck chart to a private integrity walkthrough.

Request a Private Walkthrough