A regulatory report requires proving which source columns feed each disclosed figure. Table-level lineage alone is available today. What should the team conclude about granularity?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
When the auditor needs field-level origin, a table-only lineage answer is too coarse. Match lineage granularity to the risk question—regulatory figures often need column-level proof.
Full Explanation
Regulatory evidence often needs field-level provenance. If a report must prove which source columns feed each disclosed figure and only table-level lineage exists today, the team should conclude that column-level lineage is required where risk and evidence questions demand field-level origin. Table-level lineage cannot always satisfy column-level regulatory needs when multiple fields in a table contribute differently. Lineage granularity is not irrelevant because a report is printed in color. Avoiding column-level lineage because “regulators prefer opacity” inverts compliance reality. Exam nuance: choose granularity by risk, not by a dogma that finer is always mandatory everywhere. Caveat: pursue column-level detail for high-risk disclosures first; blanket deep lineage on every obscure table can stall the program. Operationally, pick the disclosed figures, list contributing columns, attempt to evidence them in the current lineage tool, and fund column-level capture for gaps that block the regulatory narrative. Column-level lineage paired with versioned metric definitions gives regulators a coherent story: what the figure meant and which fields produced it for the reporting period under review.