Bridge Charts Are Not Optional (A Manifesto)
This is not a suggestion. This is a manifesto.
Bridge charts—waterfall charts, variance decomposition charts, whatever you call them—should be mandatory in every financial presentation that discusses variances.
Not optional. Not "nice to have." Not "when we have time."
Mandatory.
The Current Reality
Most financial presentations present variances as single numbers:
- Revenue: $500K favorable
- COGS: $200K unfavorable
- EBITDA: $150K unfavorable
Then comes the verbal explanation. "Revenue was favorable due to a combination of volume increases and pricing improvements, partially offset by mix shifts toward lower-margin products..."
By the time the explanation finishes, half the room has lost the thread. The other half is checking email.
Why Tables Fail
Tables are precise. They're also exhausting.
A table of variances gives you numbers but not relationships. It tells you what changed, not why. It requires mental math to understand relative magnitude. It forces verbal explanation to fill the gaps.
Tables are a starting point, not a destination.
The Bridge Advantage
A bridge chart does what tables can't:
Visual magnitude: Big bars = big impacts. You see relative importance instantly.
Direction clarity: Up is good (or bad). Down is the opposite. The direction communicates.
Flow narrative: Starting point → changes → ending point. The story is visible.
Discussion anchor: "Let's talk about this bar" is easier than "let's talk about the second row in the third column."
Bridge charts transform variance analysis from an exercise in reading comprehension to an exercise in pattern recognition. Humans are good at pattern recognition.
The Construction
A proper bridge chart requires:
Clear starting point: Budget? Prior year? Prior forecast? Label it prominently.
Ordered drivers: Largest impacts first. Don't bury the lead.
Directional consistency: Decide whether favorable is up or down, then stick with it.
Color coding: Green for good. Red for bad. No ambiguity.
Labels on bars: Each bar shows driver name and dollar impact.
Clear ending point: Actual results, prominently labeled.
This isn't design preference. This is communication efficiency.
When to Use Bridges
Every time you present variances. Full stop.
- Revenue variance: bridge
- Expense variance: bridge
- EBITDA variance: bridge
- Cash flow variance: bridge
- Headcount variance: bridge
- Any material change from expectation: bridge
If the number is important enough to discuss, it's important enough to visualize.
The Excuse List
"We don't have time to build charts."
If your reporting process doesn't leave time for effective communication, your process is broken.
"Our stakeholders prefer tables."
Your stakeholders prefer understanding. They've accepted tables because that's what they're given. Give them bridges and watch engagement increase.
"The data is too complex for a simple chart."
Then simplify. Consolidate small drivers. Show the top 5-7 impacts. Complexity isn't an excuse for opacity.
"We're not sure how to build them."
Learn. It's a core competency for modern finance. Excel has waterfall charts built in. Purpose-built tools generate them automatically.
The Manifesto
We, the undersigned finance professionals, declare:
- Variance analysis without visualization is incomplete
- Bridge charts are not decoration—they are communication
- Every material variance deserves a bridge
- The time spent building bridges is time invested in clarity
- Our stakeholders deserve to understand, not just to see
This is not about making pretty reports. This is about transferring understanding efficiently.
The Challenge
Pick your next financial presentation. Count the variances discussed.
Now count the bridge charts.
If those numbers don't match, you're making stakeholders work too hard. You're relying on verbal explanation when visual explanation would be clearer. You're accepting "good enough" when better is available.
Bridge charts are not optional. They're the minimum standard for variance communication.
It's time to act like it.