Can we create templates of just measures and not have to use reports?

Hi there,

I’d like to use a template account for creating some measures to be made available to other accounts. Is this possible? Specifically, I don’t want to have to create report templates that will appear in other accounts, I only want to create/share the measures from the template.

All of the information I can find so far is really geared towards re-using a full template report across multiple accounts but that is not workable for me.


Chris P.


I feel like I may have stumbled upon an idea for possible workaround…

When I export a report definition, it contains all the shared measures embedded in the exported .json. Could I strip out everything except the definitions of the shared measures and import that into a different project? If that’s possible, I could version control the .json file of measures and distribute that to other account users wishing to use the measures that we want to share across accounts.

So far I haven’t been able to figure out what’s required as far as the import definition .json goes. Stripping out everything except the cube_name and calculated_members elements produces an error.

Perhaps this is a dead end…anybody else tried this?

Hi @chrispy35,

Themplate account passes down only calculated members (in dimensions) and calculated measures (in Measures) used in some reports. If the calculation is not applied to any report, it is not transferred to the accounts branching from the template (Template accounts).

The workaround would be to create a single report (for example, “Calculated measure library”) that holds all calculated measures or several reports to group calcauted measures by their application.

You may also create an empty member in the Project dimension so a report would be blank, and none of the calculations would be needlessly executed if some user opens the measure library report. For instance, creating a calculated member with the name “Please select a project”, like in the picture below:

Zane /

Thanks Zane! I had come up with a similar idea to your suggestion minus the NULL project definition (nice!) and I think it should work well for us.

1 Like