Skip to main content
Question

Merging Scenarios Cleanly

  • May 18, 2026
  • 2 replies
  • 27 views
J
Apprentice Author
Forum|alt.badge.img+1

Does anybody have any advice on on managing the migration of scenario changes back into default plan in a clean way?

In other EPMs, multiple scenarios get spun up, different changes are made in each, and then those changes can be cleanly merged back into a main plan without any fuss in the scenario we choose to implement. The deltas are known and thrown back in without breaking any other inputs.

We used this functionality a lot when presenting possible plans to business partners and then we would merge the final changes back into plan based on their final feedback.

In Pigment, it seems like the copy function is the only mechanism available for this and it seems to hard code all values into chosen metrics rather than targeting the actual changes. We have to choose the blocks and then go app by app sending them through? It’s clunky, but it kind of works for my use case.

Further, it seems like I have to toggle “Inputs and imports populate data across all Scenarios” for every default scenario to make sure that scenarios actually have fresh data and the copy doesn’t overwrite someone else’s entry.

There doesn’t even appear to be a way to cleanly list all the changes that were made in the scenario either. Seems like the options are just copy everything or try your best to remember all the changes you made manually.

I’m actually concerned about my teams even using the scenario because the experience seems so bad when compared to what we had before, so any advice would be appreciated.

2 replies

KeeganSF
Employee
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • KeeganSFEmployee
  • Employee
  • May 19, 2026

Hi Justin,
 

Pigment doesn't have a true delta-merge between Scenarios, but that's by design. Scenarios are built for a what-if exploration, not for promoting selected changes into a plan of record.

For your workflow (presenting alternates to stakeholders, then merging finals back), the recommended solution would be a Version Dimension, not Scenarios.

Two potential options to explore:

  1. To review changes before promoting them, select both Scenarios in the Scenario selector to view them side-by-side (Metrics, Tables, Boards, Block Pages). Add a Calculated Item if you want a numeric variance column.

    Then promote via Workspace Settings → Scenarios → Settings → Copy Scenario inputs (or Scenario management → ⋮ → Copy inputs) and select only the Metrics to push — no block-by-block work.
     
  2. For recurring lock-the-plan cycles, model with a Version Dimension + Clone Data, and use Snapshots (or read-only access rights) to lock the plan of record. Versions integrate into formulas, access controls, and reporting.

For an audit of what changed in a Scenario, use Application History / Block History.

Avoid using "Inputs and imports populate data across all Scenarios" as a workaround — it strips Read-only protection and aligns all Scenarios to Default.

Documentation References: Versions and Scenarios, Compare Scenarios, Copy Inputs Between Scenarios.

Cheers,

J
Apprentice Author
Forum|alt.badge.img+1
  • Justin.AlpertApprentice Author
  • Author
  • Apprentice Author
  • May 20, 2026

Thanks Keegan, Pigment’s literature isn’t sufficient for our use case, which is why I brought it here.

My team of analysts can make hundreds of changes and evaluate multiple scenarios before finally committing  scenarios to plan in our current software. Those changes are also tracked in the scenario and we can pull a list of what they are with our current tool, in addition to it cleanly merging the changes without it overwriting the work of others.

Comparing metric by metric for manual entry is exceptionally tedious in Pigment (and would be in any system). Copying inputs by scenario doesn’t work because changes in inputs in the default scenario do not propagate to the real scenarios, thus making scenarios stale and making it dangerous to use them for real planning. Forces us to work in the same scenario and try to upload at the same time, defeating the actual purpose of flexible scenario planning. And sense I can’t pull a list of actual scenario changes, I can’t execute a data flow or even make a list that folks can work through.

Versions do not address this issue for essentially of the reasons above and I haven’t found a good way to prevent them from being messy, so making more isn’t ideal. The issue is that nether versions nor scenarios cannot be set to reflect what is in the default scenario unless an input is overwritten, thus limiting their utility as an actual operational planning tool, which is a heavy loss for us.

I’ve posted this here because I would like to hear from the community itself how they deal with this.

Ask your question here!

Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement