Yes, as a matter of fact I did, it was part of the new implementation BRD.
Let me know if you have other questions.

Oh yeah, add 5 minutes of work for a director (50 dollars lost) and remove 100 employees' man hours (1000 dollars gained), I see how that doesn't make any sense...

I usually don't respond to ACs but you weren't trolling so there goes:
The complexity involved when handling reporting for a large(r) organization prohibits full automation. There will be groups which need different inputs and the same type of outputs, the simplest example being regions (EMEA, APAC, AMER and their subdivisions). Add hierarchy-based groups on top of that and everything turns into a nightmare to manage and automate. The most optimized solution would be to build a single report with input variables, where each group would use to enter their own shit and the report would crap out the pies and barcharts and whatnot, you know, the stuff everybody loves.
Without user-facing input variables (e.g. pick yer timeframe, choose thy region(s)) I would need to manage not 500+, but 5000+ reports. Kind of a bit too much for ONE FUCKING MAN.

Yes I have a powerful scheduling solution, with agents, configurable outputs and so forth, but those only go so far. Yes, I can even automate most of those variables (e.g. group A has variables x, y, z etc) but then a shitload of people would crash on my head asking for "a small change" which turns automation into manual workload and we're back to square one.

I taught them to go to $this_url and select $these_values and bookmark their selection, said "NO" to "can't you send it to me every week?" and done deal. If they cease visiting the reports after running them twice, that's not my problem, it's theirs.

That's bad implementation right there. In my company, there's single sign on. Other companies could implement it too but hey... lazy management. Oops :)
Multipass --> Singlepass!

It's laziness because you add dozens, sometimes hundreds of man-hours a month which your company bills to people just because you don't feel like spending 5 minutes a week clicking on a fucking link.

I guess it's a naming convention which has different meanings.
A quick look here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dashboard_(management_information_systems)) brings this definition up:

OBIEE (yeah, I know, Oracle, sucks, bleah, bad) refers to "dashboards" which contain live reports, but you can set filters for those reports in such a way that they don't modify every time you refresh the dashboard.

Anyway, nitpicking.

Reports can be neatly arranged into a web-based dashboard. Big bada-boom! :)

Um... great question.
NOT.
If the dashboard isn't available, your environment sucks donkey ass.
If someone doesn't have access to the dashboard, then they either shouldn't have access in the first place or they need to be granted that access.

I don't know which reporting environment you're doing your stuff in, but maybe you should change it.
What I'm using can save snapshots, provide historical analyses, even match current data against snapshots and provide changes with drilldowns.
Or maybe we have different definitions of "dashboard".

As per title...
I am a report writer and dashboard manager. I'm also the main developer of analyses and dashboards (Business Intelligence) for a sizable LoB within my company.
Based on my experience, management is lazy. As in "fucking lazy". They want to sit on their asses, get the reports in their Inbox and never look at them.

I currently manage over 350 items in our main Business Intelligence analytics instance and about 100 more in a secondary instance. There are other environments which we're currently merging, and those contain a few hundred more items (analyses, dashboards, etc). Management asked for most of them. They looked at them once, maybe twice. They only look at about 15-20 of them on a regular basis and that's only because they're forced to do so in order to prepare for mandatory monthly operation reviews.

As for acting based on the data in there, that almost never happens. Some analyses, KPIs and scorecards have been "in the red" for months, years even with no reaction from management. Ironically, requestors come and ask me to build analyses which they already had requested and were published for them months ago, tha means "asking for stuff they already have".

We have a saying in my country: "fish starts rotting from the head". So if you ask yourself what's wrong with them, look at their managers, and their managers' managers and you'll find out. I'm yet to find one single person who gives a shit about data in a report rather than the shade of green the bars are colored.

Amazingly, I still like what I'm doing, but I'm not doing it for them, rather I'm doing it for myself because it keeps me in touch with new technology and allows me to gain a shitload of experience by pushing the environment's capabilities and limits to the maximum. But if you're not really into reporting, just run as far away from it as possible, because it's very likely things won't get better. Soon enough, you'll be asked to provide powerpoint slides. Mark my words! I've been there (but haven't done that).

Venus, Io, Titan, Jupiter all have clouds. None are formed of water. Traces, maybe, but mostly it's different stuff (carbon dioxide, methane, etc).

In the true spirit of /. I only read TFS but from it I see that only the "collapsing star" method of creating a black hole is covered. So there must be other methods for obtaining a black hole which won't violate mathematical simulations.

Transnistria is located on Moldova's eastern border and it's a hotspot but not an active one.
And as far as Russia "taking over" Romania, I guess most of the population won't care simply because their politicians are exactly like our politicians.

And fog.

Luckily, we don't share any borders with Russia.