Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Software Technology

The Subtle Tyranny Of Spreadsheets 554

pipingguy writes "I found this link on a CAD-related mailing list which questioned the current state of spreadsheet usage. Since using spreadsheets is often only one step away from PowerPoint mastery, I thought it worthy of submission." An excerpt: "The second distortion caused by conventional spreadsheets is more subtle. It's described in a 1980s paper, written by university researcher Jeffrey Kottemann and others concerning what they called 'Performance, Beliefs, and the Illusion of Control.' The paper described an experiment in which subjects were asked to perform a planning task using different tools, some of them with elaborate what-if capability and others without it." Yup, it's a ZD/Yahoo link, but it raises good questions."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Subtle Tyranny Of Spreadsheets

Comments Filter:
  • please everybody (Score:3, Insightful)

    by evil_one666 ( 664331 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:23AM (#8723651)
    for the love of god, stop misusing spreadsheets/excel as databases- They are for calculating numbers, not creating lists of things!!!!!!
    • Re:please everybody (Score:5, Interesting)

      by zyridium ( 676524 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:26AM (#8723659)
      That makes absolutely no sense at all.

      Excel is perfect for creating lists of things, and being used as a way of storing simple data...

      If you want to use that data for other purposes or it is at all complex, then sure, don't use excel.

      What is a set of numbers, what about a list of data with associated figures, get real...
      • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:27AM (#8723661)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • by zyridium ( 676524 )
          Sure, but all of the functionality in a spreadsheet is targeted at working with data.

          The best solutions with complex data are to embed or link to 'real' databases (or even other spreadsheets, they are after all just tables) from within the spreadsheet... But if you want to get so sensitive about it then you would only ever use a spreadsheet as an analysis tool, and never enter data.. which I think we would all agree is stupid for simple tasks :)
          • Re:please everybody (Score:5, Interesting)

            by smittyoneeach ( 243267 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:16AM (#8724042) Homepage Journal
            I've written a couple of applications that use .xls files as an interface.
            Idea being that you gan query some relational store, put lists of default values on a back tab, set named ranges to those lists, and then, on a front tab, use data validation to constrain the users to putting Correct Stuff in data rows.
            Oh, and there is no macro code in the .xls, so we don't run afoul of security settings.
            This is a back-to-the-future batch system. Blank forms go out as email attachments, and come back as email attachments. They are saved to a folder inexplicably named "inbox". When the time is right, we crack them open in turn and read them into our RDBMS, and then do reporting.
            If the .xls form is simple enough, in MS Access, you can have an .xls link table stub, and 'mount' each response in turn, and excecute straight SQL to read it in. Very fast and secure.
            More complicated stuff might require MS Access to instantiate Excel and open each .xls explicitely to map the response to the database.
            I've opened some of these .xls forms under GNUMeric with great results.
            Also, languages like Perl and Python can script COM objects like Access and Excel.
            Furthermore, as this is very stand-alone, you could use SQLite without concurrency issues.
            The biggest advantage of all is that you've blown off the whole web server mess. Obviously our problem domain is non-real-time, batch-able applications. But there are a lot of those. HTTP is great at what it does, but for shedule requests and what-I-did-this-week inputs (the two applications I've done in this mode), here is a way to do them that doesn't require much that isn't generally available and desktop-runnable.
            The other key is that most business people are fairly cozy with a spreadsheet interface, and die rapidly confronted with an .mdb similar. So the fear factor is reduced.
      • Re:please everybody (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Advocadus Diaboli ( 323784 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:43AM (#8724137)
        Excel is perfect for creating lists of things, and being used as a way of storing simple data...

        Yes, I have a colleauge that thinks like this. The result is an Excel sheet that if you want to make it fit on one sheet of paper you'll need a microscope to read cells. And since he's updating this "information" every week you really would like a sort of diff week-1.xls week-2.xls to find out what changed. My time is too precious to search a thousand cells if they may contain information relevant for my job or not. So this document perfectly fulfills the ISO900x criteria but is not usuable for anyone else than the author.

        • by B'Trey ( 111263 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @08:45AM (#8724493)
          This is an example of one person who does not understand how to organize information in a useful manner. It's a valid point, and quite frustrating if you're the poor sod who has to try to make sense out of his mess, but it doesn't invalidate the idea of using spreadsheets as simple databases. I've had to work with real databases that were designed by people who quite obviously had no clue what they were doing and had never heard of the concept of normalization. That isn't a strike against databases, it's just an indication of users in severe need of training.

          Excel as a simple database has a number of advantages. It's portable - most business users have access to Excel, and OpenOffice imports Excel sheets quite well. It requires limited knowledge to get some use out of it. Even unsophisticated users can usually manage a simpe search for the data they're looking for, and can update records. A well designed Access database can be easy to use, but it's much less portable. Not all users have Access, and I'm not aware of any Linux app which will open an Access database directly. (You can export the database from Access and then import it into MySQL or other database server, but that's obviously a great deal more work.) A database run on any of various servers with a custom front end, either web based or not, can be easy to use but is obviously much more difficult to attach to an email.

          If you need the power and robustness of a relational database, then use one. But for simple data collection functionality, particularly when portability is an issue, a spreadsheet works well.
        • Um, why do you want to fit it on a single sheet of paper? It's like saying "I tried to fit the book on a single sheet of paper and it's unreadable".

    • by baryon351 ( 626717 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:33AM (#8723684)
      I've ranted about something similar to this before, but occasionally in the print business I worked at we would get Excel documents to print.

      No, they didn't want printed spreadsheets - people would lay out flyers, leaflets, posters and small booklets in Excel.

      I can only guess their creative genius had to be instantly addressed and they picked the first app they could think of to lay it out on, and excel was just sitting there loaded at the time.
      • by Qube ( 17569 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:59AM (#8723992)
        In the company I used to work for, they used Excel for drawing floorplans. The surveyors would go out and take pictures, then they'd come back with some sketched floorplans and stick it all in Excel, using coloured cells and arrows/circles/labels as they wanted, to show which pic was for which room. Then they'd embed that worksheet in their word doc.

        It was horrible, and frequently they'd managed to change one small thing that would completely screw up the proportions of their worksheet.

        I suggested several times that they got Visio or Autosketch or something, but they were too tight to pay for it, despite their average chargeout rates being 70gbp/hour and doing jobs worth 6 figures or more.
      • Re:please everybody (Score:4, Informative)

        by morelife ( 213920 ) <f00fbugNO@SPAMpostREMOVETHISman.at> on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @08:26AM (#8724358)
        I use Excel constantly to do layouts for invoices, estimates, cards, presentation, etc. because of the precise sizing control. It looks professional, not cheesy at all, some of the stuff looks like it came from a printer.

        As for the database aspect, Excel is well suited for a database table layout, that's one of it's principal uses. Not a relational database, but just simple tables, it great at. There's no reason you couldn't have an address book with hundreds of entries and a dialog box front end made with macros. I did this in the past, worked great.

      • by Night Goat ( 18437 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @10:16AM (#8725278) Homepage Journal
        One time when I was working at the computer lab help desk in college, I had a guy who was writing a paper in Excel, one word per cell! He'd just type a word, hit Tab, type the next one, and so on. The question he had was "How do I doublespace my paper?" I was dumbstruck.
    • Re:please everybody (Score:5, Interesting)

      by biobogonics ( 513416 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:50AM (#8723760)
      stop misusing spreadsheets/excel as databases- They are for calculating numbers, not creating lists of things

      1. Blame AppleWorks first. Before excel it made spreadsheets like databases.

      2. If you look at the history of the spreadsheet, you will see that VisiCalc was designed for "What If?" not large scale calculating work. I was taught that spreadsheets are for the display of information - not calculation.

      3. Of course I don't even need a database for storing some kinds of information. An ordinary text file is actually good enough. For example my address book is a text file.

      4. I think the greatest misuse of spreadsheets is in using them to consolidate financial data. It's seductive. You get to see what you are doing, you get visual feedback, but

      a. data is not protected against alteration
      b. formulas are not protected against alteration
      c. there is no audit trail
      d. you are using explicit formulas instead of looping over data files

      5. Lastly, you can say to yourself when you use a spreadsheet, "Look Mom, I'm not programming." Pretty soon you are using Macros, then Word Basic then Visual Basic for Applications. Pretty soon you have a maintenance nightmare since you have spent more time getting immediate answers than you have spent in thinking about design.

      6. Yet the usual database products are a disease in themselves. I think that relational databases are not the best for transaction processing. I prefer to use programming languages with built in database support.

      7. Last, using a computer gives you the illusion that numbers are real. Printed numbers assume god like authority. But of course projections are not facts or reality, except perhaps in government or the business world!

      • Re:please everybody (Score:3, Informative)

        by MrIrwin ( 761231 )
        "For example my address book is a text file." I knew an AiX programmer who joted down phone numbers and many other things using a script:

        Add

        All this script did was make a new script file called "key" which echoed the value.

        So if you just typed the key at the command prompt the value came straight back (of course the *nix cmd line offers many variations for retrieval!).

        Dread to think about inode usage if you did this on large scale thougth!

      • by 1010011010 ( 53039 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:17AM (#8724044) Homepage
        5. Lastly, you can say to yourself when you use a spreadsheet, "Look Mom, I'm not programming." Pretty soon you are using Macros, then Word Basic then Visual Basic for Applications. Pretty soon you have a maintenance nightmare since you have spent more time getting immediate answers than you have spent in thinking about design.

        This is a common thing, in my (corporate) experience. Not much thought is put into how the business fundamentally goes about its tasks, but there is a lot of time spent, e.g., masturbating with time sheet data for salaried employees, etc.

        Making things worse, Microsoft's tools encourage instant gratification over design: VBA, Office Macros, ASP and Visual Basic lend themselves not to rapid application devlopment, but stupid application development. It's so easy to tweak and reload that the "right" answer often ends up being the "easy" answer. It's development by instant gratification. The resulting "solutions" are often fragile and difficult to maintain. It's like Powerpoint for Programmers (referencing Tufte), in that the cognitive model of the tools distorts the outcome as much or more than it helps produce it. I'm not convinced that these convenience tools result in less time spent in development, either; quite the opposite. I think any amount of time spent in design and planning will be outweighed by all of the re-work that will usually have to be done because of the mindset the tools engender. This is overlooked because planning isn't a source of instant gratification (it seems to drag on forever, as it requires actual thinking) -- whereas development with tools like these is a source of instant gratification, thus masking their own consumption of your time.
        • You're endangering my revenue stream.

          If it weren't for those organically grown excel/access nightmare programs most companies would never think of hiring a programmer. They hire us after they build those things up to their final catastrophic state and realize that they need somebody to come in a fix it up right.

          I don't know about you, but if it weren't for homegrown messes like that it never would have occurred to me that anyone needed a program to import proposed insurance fee schedules and munge those
        • I like it when the dude celebrates "processing an impossible amount of data" using Excel and other Microsoft products and the two fat chicks come out and dump the whole water cooler tank of water on him.
        • by 4of12 ( 97621 )

          but stupid application development.

          Stupid, yes, from the standpoint of maintainable code, efficient use of computer resources, best algorithms, etc. Absolutely stupid.

          However, Stupid Application Development, however SAD, is often very useful in getting answers right now for people without a clue about intelligent application development, i.e., most of the people sitting in front of computers these days.

          I think the best you can do under these circumstances is to have the underlying tools be more modular

        • by smittyoneeach ( 243267 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @10:48AM (#8725552) Homepage Journal
          I submit that you're blaming the tool, not the user.
          Technologies cited may lend themselves to myopic, tactical uses, but that is an unavoidable side effect.
          You could, in the same spirit, blame the vagina for prostitution.
          Furthermore, you don't offer an alternative. Do you want an MSWorks-type dumbsheet for the masses? What reasonably useful system do you propose when the cheesesheet isn't packing the heat? Something with an Emacs-derived keyboard interface for macro coding to keep out the riff-raff?
          What about the heuristic problems that are simply going to be a muddle while requirements evolve, where total hackability is a feature? We treat design as some sort of Revealed Truth, a magic wand that will Save Us From The Fury of the Spaghetti Code. Ahem.
          As noted elsewhere, making it easy for the usele^H^Hr to drum up business is far more feature than bug.
      • by Awful Truth ( 766991 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @08:29AM (#8724380)
        Your point #5 brushes with the real problem. I work in a large -- very large -- financial organization, and we often see users sneaking business code into various 'documents.' Their favorite is, of course, Excel.

        When we ask our users, "why?" the answer is always "it's too much trouble to deal with you technology folks." They're willing to forgo robustness, auditing, data validation, etc. in order to escape the technology bureaucracy: Getting budgets and resources, all those damn planning meetings, dealing with System Administrators, and so on. They generally know the risks and limitations of using Excel but feel the advantage of getting quick results is entirely worth it.
    • by TelcusFreshbreeze ( 601347 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:06AM (#8723823)
      Not that I condone using Excel for data handling but consider this. When most PC's come with Standard MSOffice (which includes Excel but not Access, which comes in Professional), what application are users gonna be doing all database type scenarios?

      Microsoft have basically forced Excel to be the packhorse of data manipulation for the masses.

      • by sdemelo ( 712366 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:33AM (#8724099)
        This is quite true. For the typical user (usually not a /. reader), data is also much easier to understand and manipulate using Excel. Searching and manipulating in Access is much less intuitive, which makes Excel more popular and people are less likely to use Access, which means it's not as familiar ... you get the idea.
    • by supergiovane ( 606385 ) <arturo.digioiaNO@SPAMing.unitn.it> on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:18AM (#8723867)
      Excel as a database [neopoleon.com].
    • by zakezuke ( 229119 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:23AM (#8723881)
      I find excel a wonderful powerful intermediary program because of it's ease of use to take a list of information that's delimited by a field, import it, export it delimited to another format.

      I don't understand the problem using excel as a small database. If you outgrow it, just export the whole shabang... delimited by whatever your database software supports. Heck, there have been times I reccomended using excel when getting groups of 10 or more people together doing manual data entry. The data gets entered, it's organized, and easily incorperated.

      No, excel is not a database, but a spreadsheet can be used for more thens then calculating numbers.
      • Re:please everybody (Score:3, Interesting)

        by apdt ( 575306 )
        If you outgrow it, just export the whole shabang... delimited by whatever your database software supports.

        You make it sound as though that's a trivial task. It can be as long as everyone who used the spreadsheet was disciplined about how they entered data. The problem is that that is rarely the case, and the spreadsheet doesn't enforce any data types etc.. Converting a series of data from a spreadsheet to a database can be a huge PITA. I've been there, it ain't pretty.

        Heck, there have been times
      • by Prowl ( 554277 )
        If you outgrow it, just export the whole shabang... delimited by whatever your database software supports


        Christ, you sound like a manager
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:41AM (#8723944)
      I wish I could persuade my boss to give me data in an Excel spreadsheet rather than a PDF produced by Word. At least I can save a spreadsheet as CVS and parse it for entry into a database.
    • by sreeram ( 67706 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:08AM (#8724021)

      Could you kindly expand on your argument?

      There are already a lot of posts berating the use of Excel as a database. Yet, I have not seen a single clear argument why this is a Bad Thing. The closest someone has gotten to is saying how users might inadvertently delete columns or add unwanted formatting, etc.

      That's really just the fault of the WYSIWYG mentality of MS Office applications (in certain cases, the formatting is a bonus, as you'll see below). I don't see anything inherently wrong with the "spreadsheet as a DB" concept.

      Seriously, a spreadsheet IS a DB. Its rows and columns perform exactly the same functions as a DB's rows and columns. While a DB might have more features, such as primary keys, indexing and fancy querying, a spreadsheet fits the role if you don't want those extra features.

      I should know. I use DBs extensively (MySQL and Oracle). I also use Excel quite a lot. I am in the statistics and decision analysis field, so I use DBs and Excel for a lot of number crunching.

      But I also use Excel to store small lists. For example, I have in front of me a sheet containing conferences and journals (that are relevant to me), ordered by due date. Excel's conditional formatting allows me to highlight those conferences that are due soon and grey out those that are past. With a single click, I can sort based on other columns, such as ranking.

      I fail to see why I should be forced to use the cumbersome SQL interface to do this. Unless I spend much time writing the necessary scripts, webpages and CGIs, I am not likely to get the same flexibility I have with Excel for manipulating the list. Excel does the job for me, with minimal effort.

      I think a lot of people complaining here are doing so knee-jerk. Somehow, the attitude is that a DB is "sacred" and Excel is a bastard child. This is wrong. A DB is just whatever fits your purpose for storing data (or lists or whatever). It can be an Excel spreadsheet, an RDBMS, a flat text file or even an opaque file (think Data.fs in Zope). The wise man uses the right tools for the job, and doesn't slavishly adhere to misguided prejudices.

      • by Threni ( 635302 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:42AM (#8724126)
        ---
        There are already a lot of posts berating the use of Excel as a database. Yet, I have not seen a single clear argument why this is a Bad Thing. The closest someone has gotten to is saying how users might inadvertently delete columns or add unwanted formatting, etc.
        ---

        Some people are too hung up on what something was designed for, and overlook what it could be used for. Presumably they're against the Wright brothers use of bicycle parts for the construction of the first plane also.
      • by linuxtelephony ( 141049 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:42AM (#8724127) Homepage
        One of the biggest reasons is the sort function combined with [l]user error.

        If a spreadsheet has more columns that fit on the screen, and is used by more than one person, at some point you can almost count on someone highlighting some, not all, of the columns and then sorting the highlighted columns, and saving the file. When that happens, the highlighted columns are sorted, the rest are left as is. Worst, the next person to use the file doesn't always realize the corruption has occurred.

        This was a problem in Office 97 and earlier. I think it was a problem in Office 2k, but I don't remember. I have not tested this on Office XP or 2003.
      • Re:please everybody (Score:5, Informative)

        by ChiaBen ( 160517 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:47AM (#8724158) Homepage
        You shouldn't be forced to use SQL for manipulating data, you should be restrained from using Excel. ;) The reality of the differences between a spreadsheet and a database is that a spreadsheet lacks the data constraints (relationships) necessary to keep a user from entering bad data. A database can control this (data integrity) to a large degree (depending on your datamodel design).

        An example I fight with daily is product attributes. I maintain a n ecommerce database with about 180,000 products, each of which would have, say, a color. The problem is that if I import data from a spreadsheet it might randomly insert spaces in the data (i.e. "Black " or " Black" instead of "Black"), whereas if I get the data entered through our tools, the user selects from a list of colors, and only if the choice doesn't exist do they add a new one.

        You mention how people are doing a knee-jerk that 'DB's are sacred'. Yes, they are. So are spreadsheets, the problem is that people bastard-ize their use and end up confused about why they both exist, and how to use them.

        Database = Data storage, data consistency, ease of data maintenance
        Spreadsheet = Data analysis, data redundancy, lack of data integrity.

        That's how I see it, anyhow.
      • by Rich0 ( 548339 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:55AM (#8724207) Homepage
        As long as your DB can fit in a single table, doesn't need transactional support and journaling, and doesn't need to be multi-user (at the same time), then excel can potentially do just fine.

        For a quick list of some sort it is generally OK.

        On the other hand, I've seen tons of spreadsheets with columns like:
        Home Phone, Home Address, Business Phone, Business Address, Home Phone 2, Home Address 2, etc...

        In cases like that the contact info should be in a child table with a 1-to-many relationship. Actually, if you have multiple customers in the same household maybe it should be many-to-many...

        And that is where databases come into their own - they encourage better design of how data is stored, and when the database grows it makes data a lot easier to get at and manipulate.

        If you only have 100 rows it really doesn't matter what you store it in. You probably would be able to store it with paper and pencil with little trouble...
    • Re:please everybody (Score:3, Interesting)

      by JanneM ( 7445 )
      This is not intended as a flame or anything, but then what do you recommend?

      I use Gnumeric for (among other things) a list of movies I have (about 80-100 rows). The fields are Movie name, category, and who (if anybody) has borrowed it at the moment.

      Another spreadsheet "database" I have is an expanding table of the time taken for me to bicycle to work every morning; it is sort of fun (and motivating) to plot the long-time trend. The flexibility of the spreadsheet also allows me to experiment with various w
    • The first poster obviously didn't read the article. It has *nothing* to do with using spreadsheets as databases. It covers two things. Firstly, it covers the inability of spreadsheets to deal with probability in projections, and our tendency to optimistically adjust some figures up and others down until we get the result we want. The problem is that a spreadsheet can only show a single 'snapshot' state:

      It's not too hard to appreciate the difference between products that incorporate uncertainty and those t

    • The problem is that for everyone who is a non-techie and has never handled a large sized database or have been involved in extracting data from relational databases, they don't see the difference at all between a database and a spreadsheet. In the eyes of your average joe user, they both have rows and columns so they both must be used to store rows of information!

      A real life example that still gets on my nerves to this day is when a co-worker in different department who knew I was a "computer person" a

  • by flaez ( 471571 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:29AM (#8723666) Homepage
    back in 1997 when I was a physics exchange student in Glasgow, they made me solve a *quantum machanics* problem using excel! it was ridiculous. I kept the spreadsheet just for its absurdity (it's the only .xls file on my entire harddrive)

  • A manager at a company I worked for was presenting figures for the last year. He showed the financial breakdown for each division, with the profit being calculated as a percentage for each division. At the bottom, there was a summary line showing the total figures for the company and including the "average profit" for the company.

    Which he had calculated by summing the profit column and dividing by the number of divisions.

    I mentioned that this was producing a somewhat unrealistic figure, with a couple of small divisions showing very good profit margins and the largest department showing a slight loss. "No, that's the mathematical definition of 'median'," he answered.
  • by faldore ( 221970 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:34AM (#8723688)
    The only possible explanation I can think of for some of the Excel sheets I have seen in the workplace, is that the poor fool who wrote it didn't have a clue how to use Access. The kicker is when they come to me to write code to automate it. Excel is simply evil. The only thing its good for is making pretty charts.
  • by Sanity ( 1431 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:37AM (#8723700) Homepage Journal
    ...is that most people don't really understand statistics, and tools like spreadsheets help people to forget this reality by blinding them with lots of authorative looking numbers.

    The question is whether a tool can ever be a substitute for a good understanding of statistics and probability - or whether it will always be a case of monkeys playing with ever more sophisticated typewriters...?

    • by kidgenius ( 704962 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:59AM (#8723800)
      No. A good statistics knowledge is fundamental in making sure that the data you are putting in is valid. As the old adage goes, "Garbage In, Garbage Out."
      If you are just mindlessly putting stuff together and say "I think a median/mean/standard dev would go good here" then it's obvious that you shouldn't be doing statistical analysis. Also, after the numbers have been calculated, you need to understand what the significance of them are. I work in a highly statistical field (Reliability Engineering) and I will say that at times it really is a black art. Things may at first look good/bad, but until you sit down, and think about what it all means, you will have way of knowing whether what you just got out of your analysis is "correct."
      • Read my sig. It came from someone describing the blind use of stats without really knowing what one is doing.

        I am in another fairly statistics heavy field, but one where many people are not mathematically inclined. This leads to a lot of people doing exactly what you describe.

        Personally I think even tools like SPSS (which is heavily used in my field) are dangerous because they lead one to doing analyses that don't make any sense given the data. SAS is better, as is S-Plus/R, since these require some un
  • by farghen ( 759198 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:37AM (#8723701)
    "The expected Year 1 profit is $1 million, but there's a 30 percent chance of losses for the first two years."

    Unfortunately or not, this is not what the bosses want to hear. They want to know that profits will be $1 million. Perhaps the spreadsheets have not adapted to uncertainties for a reason.
  • by pubjames ( 468013 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:38AM (#8723705)

    This reminds me of something a successful businessman told me about accountants: "Accountants know the cost of everything, and the value of nothing".

    A problem occurs when people look at a spreadsheet of accounts and think it represents a business. It doesn't. A classic illustration of this is Marks & Spencer's returns policy. If you buy a pair of trousers from Marks & Spencers and then once you've got them home decide they don't fit or whatever, you can return them, no questions asked. To an accountant, this is just a cost. There is no identifiable figure in the accounts that you can point to and say, there's the benefit of that cost. And yet many people shop there because of the policy.
    • R&D (Score:3, Insightful)

      by pubjames ( 468013 )

      Another thing that suffers from this type of mentality is long term R&D. Japan has had many very long term R&D projects which has been criticised by outsiders as being too long term.

      I've just been watching a Japanese robot demo on the TV. Very impressive. I think the fruits of there long term investment in robotics R&D will be seen in the next decade.
    • by misterpies ( 632880 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:54AM (#8723774)

      'Fraid your friend's not very original. The original quote is from Oscar Wilde: "a cynic is a man who knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing"(
  • by rufusdufus ( 450462 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:43AM (#8723718)
    Of course this is actually an advertisement for a specific software package. But whats funny is that the story undercuts itself: It explains that people are wasting their time doing detailed future predictions with spreadsheets. Then it goes on to push this particular product as a way of doing detailed future predictions using statistics. But they never make the case that making predictions is good anyway, while they do provide evidence that its a waste of time!

    I dont know anyone who uses their spreadsheets for doing any kind of predictions. Everyone I know uses it just like the old-fashioned pen-and-paper..spreadsheet! Its a way of accounting for the here-and-now. How many businessmen don't understand their business prospects better than a garbage-in-garbage out number crunching computer?
  • by Technician ( 215283 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:44AM (#8723721)
    A spread sheet is not a stastics program. However if your office bundle includes a hammer, everyting starts to look like a nail. Excell does math, It's the hammer that makes stastics look like a spreadsheet problem. Enough said? Hammer - nail, Excell - spredsheetable data. For stastics programs look here for a list of some real stastics programs. They are not spreadsheets.

    http://www.wch.org.au/CEBU/software.htm

    I guess it's kind of like trying to write HTML with MS Notepad. It can be done, however other tools make the job easer.
  • by shic ( 309152 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:44AM (#8723725)
    Spreadsheets have been and will always continue to be an extraordinarily powerful ad-hoc tool for those wishing to tabulate data with automated calculations. They are worse than useless if, for whatever reason, the user has no savvy approach to the problem at hand, or if the model which requires manipulation has no concrete representation.

    After many years with little use for a spreadsheet (previously having used Supercalc and Lotus 123) I was shocked by corporate state of the art. Specifically, I was disturbed by the type system employed to represent cell values and by the way in which formatting settings can so easily obscure the values actually being processed. The way in which Excel handles dates seems particularly horrific... and OO-Spreadsheet just mimics the same mistakes. I was also amazed that modern spreadsheets haven't started to use extensible libraries to represent new data types. It seems a no-brainer for a spreadsheet to make use of pluggable C# or Java classes to allow domain specific types to be manipulated in the context of a spreadsheet environment. Am I missing something - or have we not only failed to advance the art (as suggested by the article) but actually taken several steps backwards?

    • The problem raised is intractability and that has no solution. The problem bemoans the fact that people use spreadsheets without understanding error propagation! Duh, in math terms it's been described:

      The limit of Engineering as GPA goes to zero is MBA.

      Typically, math is the skill that drives that GPA down. OK, the bad joke is starting to look like a flame, and it's true that clueless big dogs with their sensless five year plans make me angry, but please - this is a joke. Everyone has got their skill

  • Financial Planning (Score:5, Insightful)

    by awol ( 98751 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:45AM (#8723729) Journal
    The scope of the article is really limited to the use of spreadsheets in financial planning (forecasting). For which the criticisms of the author and the material he cites are pretty valid. Indeed we all have our pet hates when it comes to how the tool is used (you have no idea how much of the financial world is ruled by this spreadsheet or the other driving trading decisions!) however, the tabular representation of data is not inherently broken and it behooves the computer scientists amongst us to ask why this form has usurped the database for the representation of simple datasets and all to frequently complex ones.
  • by Singletoned ( 619322 ) <singletoned@gmail.com> on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:46AM (#8723735) Homepage
    "When you're holding Excel, everything looks like a spreadsheet" [yoz.com] by Yoz Grahame

    I particularly enjoyed it, and it made me wonder why I've always hated Excel. maybe it's time to forgive...

    (I always used to like Pipdream on the Archimedes though. That was a combined spreadsheet and word processor).

    • by hyc ( 241590 )
      I wanted to model the characteristics of a turbocharger I was planning to install in my car. It seemed to me a spreadsheet was the ideal way to try various scenarios. Of course, modeling a turbo requires entering lots of lists of numbers. I had to fight with it, but despite my years of programming experience, figuring out Excel was easier and faster than writing my own custom app for the job.

      Turbocharger Spreadsheet [comcast.net]

      Now I can just enter engine size, compression ratios, etc., select from a variety of comp
  • by joonasl ( 527630 ) <joonas.lyytinenNO@SPAMiki.fi> on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:47AM (#8723742) Homepage
    I think that the root of the problem is that many people who are not IT professionals are thought only how to use spreansheets (MS Excel) and word processors (MS Word) in college/university. Since their "toolkit" is so limited, they tend to do all possible tasks using those programs, even if they are not the best possible choices. I currently work in technology solutions branch one of the big consulting companies, and you can't belive what the business major managers use Excel here for.

    So far I have seen Excell used for issue mangement, system requirement repository, time tracking, time estimation, code dependency tracking, system reference data and configuration data repository, ...
    ..and in 99% of the cases the spreadsheets don't even use the SUM function.

  • by beacher ( 82033 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:49AM (#8723756) Homepage
    To anyone that has Excel '97 - On a new Worksheet, Press F5. Type X97:L97 and hit enter. Press the tab key. Hold Ctrl-Shift. Click on the Chart Wizard toolbar button. Use mouse to fly around - Right button forward/ Left button reverse.

    Excel 2000? Under file menu, do 'Save as Web Page'. Say 'Publish Sheet' and 'Add Interactivity'. Save to some htm page on your drive. Load the htm page with IE (don't give me any grief over this one- you're already screwing around with Excel so I don't want to hear it ). You should have Excel in the middle of the page. Scroll to row 2000, column WC. Select row 2000, and tab so that WC is the active column. Hold down Shift+Crtl+Alt nad click the Office logo in the upper-left. If you have DirectX, you will be playing what looks like spy hunter. Use the arrow keys to drive, space to fire, O to drop oil slicks, and when it gets dark, use H for your headlights. -B
  • Suspect citation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dtmos ( 447842 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:57AM (#8723788)

    A quick google search reveals evidence of only one paper (but not the paper itself, unfortunately) entitled, "Performance, Beliefs, and the Illusion of Control", see, e.g., here [umd.edu]:

    Kottemann, J.E., Davis, F.D., & Remus, W.R. (1994). Computer-assisted decision making: Performance, beliefs, and the illusion of control. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57, 26-37.

    Note that this paper was published in 1994; it's not a "1980s paper" as cited in the article. Careless errors like this make one wonder what else in the author's train of thought is similarly researched. Perhaps he's just incorporating incertainty into his references, too--or, maybe he considers 1994 to be statistically similar to the 1980s?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @05:58AM (#8723794)
    "Enhancements" of spreadsheets over the last few years have not involved any substantive improvements in functionality, but have primarily just involved enhancing their "typesetting" capabilities, that is, the ability to change fonts, insert special formatting, and to otherwise make tables look "pretty."

    I put "enhancements" in quotes because I am skeptical that this actually represents a true improvement of either the quality of the information or user efficiency in finding and using information.

    These so-called improvements gloss over the continuing problems that plague spreadsheet users:
    • Spreadsheet models encourage the use of "spaghetti" logic, where cells point to cells that point to cells, and can grow into random networks of calculation logic;
    • They permit lots of easy off-by-one errors;
    • They generally are difficult to verify/audit;
    • They do not provide good tools for managing data either in terms of consolidation or searching for specific detail;
    • Perhaps most importantly, despite their convenience, spreadsheets are not a robust repository for information.
    I have seen one multinational enterprise that (believe it or not) built a budgeting system atop sets of dozens of departmental spreadsheets that they would roll up into a master budget; while it's a neat extension of the technology, only a fool would try to use this to run a large enterprise. One bad link in one subsheet, and the whole house of cards could fall down. (And the "top" vendor these days, Microsoft, isn't noted for building products that are of industrial grade robustness.)

    The last few points point towards where I would like to see spreadsheets go. They have been, and are very good at producing ad-hoc, one-off reports. This is a proper use of spreadsheets.

    They are often being used instead as repositories for information that really ought to be managed by a database management system of some sort.

    What spreadsheets should do is to allow, nay encourage, the use of data extracts from external sources, notably relational databases. The use of named ranges (which are a venerable feature from at least as early as Lotus 123 v2.01) is of assistance; Lotus Improv was a rather complex-to-use test platform for improved "modelling" whose functionality included database extraction.

    Using external repositories permits the benefits of:
    • A single repository that can be kept correct, rather than a multitude of mutually incompatible data stores;
    • Data synchronization (a restatement of the last);
    • All the good RDBMS "stuff" like:
      • Field validation,
      • Maintaining field relationships,
      • Transaction logging,
      • Centralized backups,
      and perhaps even more sophisticated things such as
      • Data modelling and
      • Stored Procedures/Triggers
    In effect, the real point I would propose is that the task of building a spreadsheet should involve some data modelling, with thought not just about the report at hand, but also about where the data comes from and perhaps should go to.
    • These so-called improvements gloss over the continuing problems that plague spreadsheet users:
      • Spreadsheet models encourage the use of "spaghetti" logic, where cells point to cells that point to cells, and can grow into random networks of calculation logic;

      Yes, yes. And programming languages with only gotos are inherently evil. But with a discipline on the part of the user it is possible to build maintainable systems.

      • They permit lots of easy off-by-one errors;

      Very true, and I have seen it happen any

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:00AM (#8723804)
    Spreadsheets suffer from programming flaws that we've ruthlessly stamped out in programming languages.

    Some of these flaws are :
    - Cryptic names for fields
    - No comments
    - No obvious flow of control
    - No modularisation
    - No capability to test spreadsheet sub-components in isolation
    - No capability to do a diff to see what's changed between versions

    Spreadsheets also add flaws of their own, such as unlocalised references.

    If we had to design the worst possible "programming language" we'd be wise to look at spreadsheets for an example of what to include.
    • by MrWa ( 144753 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @08:54AM (#8724562) Homepage
      Some minor points:

      - Cryptic names for fields
      How is this "stamped out in programming languages" other than convention and training? Is is forced on you?
      - No comments
      Excel can "comment" to some extent.
      - No obvious flow of control
      Some would argue that the freeform nature of a spreadsheet is what makes it so appealing.
      - No modularisation
      - No capability to test spreadsheet sub-components in isolation
      - No capability to do a diff to see what's changed between versions

      Excel can keep track of every change made - didn't we just have an article making fun of Microsoft for this feature in Word?!

      Not saying the spreadsheets, or Excel specifically, is the answer to everything.

  • by Trurl's Machine ( 651488 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:04AM (#8723814) Journal
    I was recently on the market for a new car (hoorrray!). I shortlisted three vehicles for me to consider and I asked the salespeople of the respective companies to mail me data on service plan, warranty, replacement part prices etc. on all the three vehicles. I got two replies with Excel documents and one with a printer-friendly PDF.

    I am all for open standards in communication, but what shall I do? Send a reply to the salesman "you f*ing Microserf moron, I don't want your car if you force me to buy a bloody spreadsheet just to read how much do you charge for a goddamned air filter?" But is it wise to choose a car just because of the software that a salesman uses?

    Finally I picked the one that was described in PDF. It was a coincidence - a decisive factor was actually that the make of that car constantly tops in the consumer surveys, while the other two are just about average. But then I started to think - maybe that's not a coincidence after all? Maybe this make tops in surveys just because it's policy is to make all stages of customer experience as convenient as possible and they ask themselves the question that other car salesmen don't ask - "what if my prospective client does not use Microsoft Excel(TM) or Microsoft Word(TM)?".

    Maybe it is possible for us to vote with our wallets against proprietary, closed standards?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:24AM (#8723887)
    At university, I am taking a course in business modelling. We use Simul8 s/ware to generate thousands of monti-carlo 'runs', then analyse the results as if they were real data.

    But it's not real data! It's completely determistic, even with a pseudo-random generator. The only things we deal with are simple supply-chain networks, which are just malkov-chains with a few probability distributions. We're using 2000 pounds worth of s/ware to solve high-school statistics problems :-/

    You'd get the same results, and have real justifications for the numbers, by using an HP Calculator and a pencil. Alarmingly our lecturers have yet to explain what any of the distributions mean, but they keep using words like 'proof' and 'verify'.

    I'm back to linearly regressing my calculated data. It's insane, they're all insane, one day the sane people will rule, wibble ...
  • by gomel ( 527311 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:39AM (#8723934) Homepage Journal
    From the article:

    The first distortion is the use of point values and simple arithmetic instead of probability distributions and statistical measures. So far as I know, there's no off-the-shelf spreadsheet product--certainly none in common use--that provides for input of numbers as uncertain quantities, even though almost all of our decisions rest on forecasts or on speculations.

    I am a student of this university : http://www.sgh.waw.pl/
    Currently I am having a course in the use of Excel for prediction purposes. We do a lot of different case studies. We use Monte Carlo simulations, statistical tests, Markov chains and so on. We always discuss risk (variance, value-at-risk and so on). Excel is our basic tool and it is fine. We use different tools for specific purposes: Best-Fit for distribution fitting.

    It is not a flaw of the tool, it is a flaw of the user. As someone said, give a monkey a PC instead of a type writer and you will get digital bullshit. I can only demand that people without proper education are not allowed to deliver multi-million business forcasts.
    • Currently I am having a course in the use of Excel for prediction purposes. We do a lot of different case studies. We use Monte Carlo simulations, statistical tests, Markov chains and so on. We always discuss risk (variance, value-at-risk and so on). Excel is our basic tool and it is fine. We use different tools for specific purposes: Best-Fit for distribution fitting.

      I suggest you seek another university. A spread sheet is not even an adequate tool for teaching Monte Carlo (MC).

      MC simulations typically

  • "Powerpoint Mastery" (Score:5, Informative)

    by foobsr ( 693224 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:50AM (#8723967) Homepage Journal
    Since using spreadsheets is often only one step away from PowerPoint mastery.

    Erm .. for "Powerpoint Mastery" have a look at Tufte [edwardtufte.com] "The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint".

    Yes, I know it was discussed here before (as I guess), but still - it is worth a mention.

    CC.
  • by kahei ( 466208 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:51AM (#8723972) Homepage

    1 -- the article is a content-free advert for Whitebirch's financial toolkit

    2 -- Excel is an incredibly powerful and important piece of software which many if not most large corps can't do without. There is no alternative to it. The fact that it's unpleasant to use is beside the point -- nobody has been able to come up with a better (or even comparable) replacement. In my experience, there is a large segment of the IT community that is pathologically unable to focus on business needs enough to understand this.

    • by gkuz ( 706134 )
      nobody has been able to come up with a better (or even comparable) replacement

      I call bullshit. How old are you? How many PC software products in that space do you remember? Javelin was both excellent and revolutionary. Lotus Improv was close (but not close enough) to a GUI Javelin. Both used the spreadsheet paradigm as a sort ow "window" into real data. Both failed because the average PC-using simpleton wanted the "simplicity" of 1-2-3. 1-2-3 was overtaken by Excel because their GUI versions sucked worse

  • A little skeptical (Score:5, Interesting)

    by astrashe ( 7452 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @06:52AM (#8723974) Journal
    I saw my first spreadsheet on an old Osborne computer. My dad knew a guy who bought small banks, and he had the Osborne and VisiCalc.

    Before this guy could buy a bank, he had to value them, and his valuations were always based on a few guesses (predictions) -- what interest rates would be, or whatever (I don't know exactly how he did it).

    He told me that when he started doing this stuff with a normal calculator, a pencil, and paper, changing a guess took him a couple of days. Then he got a programmable calculator, and managed to cut it down to about 5 hours. With VisiCalc, it took a few seconds.

    The point being that both the programmable calculator and the spreadsheet software gave him an edge in his work -- they made him better at buying banks. They paid for themselves.

    *If* no one is using the sorts of software described in this article, and *if* the software really does make you better at making decisions, people should be able to use it to buy banks (or whatever) and do a better job than their competitors. It should give you a leg up in the market place.

    That's exactly what happened with spreadsheets. That's why they're popular. A lot of dumb people have started to misuse them, apparently (that sounds plausible to me), but there's no denying that they have provided and continue to provide enormous value to users.

    If this new stuff is better, then why isn't Warren Buffet using it? If the answer is "because he's too dumb", why doesn't someone else start using it, and outperform Buffet?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:01AM (#8723999)
    You know, whenever we're talking about software like P2P file sharing, or freeware DVD drivers, or software that opens Adobe files for backups, the Slashdot crowd tends to be firmly in the "don't punish the technology for abuse by the users" camp.


    And then we have these PowerPoint, Excel, yada yada threads where the Slashdot crowd tends to be firmly in the "don't punish the users, it's the fault of these evil software applications" camp.


    What's up with that?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:06AM (#8724014)
    Having worked as a front-office developer in a very large bank i can give a good example of how spreadsheets can be misused Excel spreadsheets were used by all traders on the desk i was supporting. They did not want to move to any other tool because only spreadsheets gave them the flexibility they wanted. The spreadsheets were absolutely HUGE, think direction 20 or more tabs, all with hundreds of DDE Links to Reuters RICS - complicated formulas hanging off these links producing tables of data each time a DDE link updated (about once a second on average). We had to install gigabytes of ram and dual CPU's desktops for them just so they could run their spreadsheets. Sure excel would crash every now and then, but not often enough to switch to a new solution.
    IT tried to introduce new more stable trading tools without success, not flexible enough-did not calculate "their" prices correctly-blahblah. Controlling tried to impose new tools on them to get a grip on their price calculation- all very difficult when the only data source is a "spreadsheet".
    The most insane thing that we tried was to write a spreadsheet parser that would traverse all cells, build a dependency graph, reparse the formulas inside to translate this to another programming language. Needless to say this failed.
    • by mccalli ( 323026 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @08:22AM (#8724334) Homepage
      IT tried to introduce new more stable trading tools without success, not flexible enough-did not calculate "their" prices correctly-blahblah.

      Err...I too work doing rates-related stuff for major banks. Blah blah blah??!! That's the entire point of the rates business - that's why those traders are employed, because they can tweak their prices to make a profit from the market.

      Controlling tried to impose new tools on them to get a grip on their price calculation- all very difficult when the only data source is a "spreadsheet".

      It did what? Really? A cost centre tried to impose inadequate tools (your own admission - not flexible enough) on to people who were actually generating cash for the bank? And they rejected it did they? Good Lord, how terribly surprising.

      Sorry, but I'm utterly shocked at the cavalier attitude displayed here. I work doing a very similar job to the one described (writing tools to control rates pricing), and I tell you now that wandering in to our profit-producing users and saying that their rules are a load of 'blah blah blah' would, quite correctly, get me booted out of the City forever.

      Cheer,
      Ian

  • Excel Cluster! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mclearn ( 86140 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @07:43AM (#8724134) Homepage

    I swear to god. You can't make this stuff up. Our financial institution actually ran (past tense -- I'm converting it) a cluster of PCs all running Excel for pricing hugely complex financial products.

    After finally getting my hands on the underlying VBA code, I printed it out. It was 56 pages of data movement (copy this piece of data from here to there). The actual pricing code was built as an add-in module and used as a formula.

    The only reason for this system's existance is that several years ago someone heard about clustering PCs. They decided that it would be cool to do it with MS Windows and Excel. Gah. It's been an expensive mistake.

  • Please! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pkaral ( 104322 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @08:04AM (#8724249)
    The classical Slashdot debate features something-stupid-done-or-said-by-non-IT-savvy-gene ral-managers, and then the appropriate bashing by IT-savvy Slashdotters. If there were a similar forum where my profession were in majority, they would probably be bashing this very thread right now (I am an economist and business manager).

    Just like, say, PERL or Java, spreadsheets can be used well, and they can be used poorly. Furthermore, people with good "technical" Excel skills can produce lousy spreadsheets with little analytical value, and vice versa. I have seen some fantastic spreadsheets which have totally revolutionized the way people saw a problem. At an insurance company I worked with, they used a huge spreadsheet to do a simulation of the effects on every single customer of a planned, dramatic price increase. The result: They realized that the price increase would have much less impact than they feared. Thus, the product was kept and the employees kept their jobs. The thing with the spreadsheet was that it was developed in fast trial-and-error loops, which meant that their run-once-per-night SAS tools were not an option (this was 7 years ago).

    (I have, by the way, also seen people spend 3 months on developing a mega-spreadsheet for assessing the value of a company, only to use the wrong assumption for a critical value and thereby introducing an error of about 40% in the valuation [that critical value being the discount rate]).

    I can assure all the concerned citizens of this forum that there is indeed a lot of excellent, first-rate Excel usage out there. Analytical power beyond our wildest dreams is at the fingertips of people without skills in programming at any lower level. This, believe it or not, is a good thing, because anyone who has dedicated himself to becoming great at programming is probably less skilled in disciplines such as financial analysis.

    Sure, there is "bad code". Sure, people get a false sense of control. Sure, this new tool puts too much options in the hands of people who do not know how to use them. But how would that be untrue of other IT tools or programming environments? What does it matter that they use Excel as a database, as long as it gets their work done easier than getting an SQL education and then doing it "right"?

    Biases are part of all decision-making (as even economists are realizing [economist.com]). So what if that is the case in Spreadsheet World, too?
  • by RetiredMidn ( 441788 ) * on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @08:07AM (#8724262) Homepage
    A couple of anecdotes (I worked at Lotus for a few years starting in 1983):

    There was an issue of PC World that came out in late '83 or '84 that surveyed readers on which applications they used in various categories. Lotus 1-2-3 ranked third (something like 17% of respondents) in the word processing category. (This was not a mistake; it turned out that some users of 1-2-3 found it easier to enter a few paragraphs of text into a column of cells and use the Range Justify command, than to exit 1-2-3, change floppies, and launch WordPerfect.)

    When I started at Lotus, my wife was a buyer for a local retail chain. She had to do quarterly plans where she distributed a fixed number of dollars over various styles of merchandise among several branches of stores; she had been doing this in rows and columns with pencil, paper, and eraser. I built a model for her to do this using 1-2-3, and several days work was reduced to hours; her peer buyers would visit us quarterly to take advantage of the new tool.

    My model was flawed; I formatted the calculated values to 2 decimal places, and 1-2-3 rounded the displayed values accordingly. As a result, the actual sum of a column of calculated values was not equal to the sum of the displayed values. (A further example of the ongoing weakness of spreadsheets, and of my own carelessness; my numeric methods prof would have been ashamed of me.) (It should also be noted that my wife caught the mistake by eye, without even doing the math herself; I had been so trustful of the tools that I hadn't bothered to challenge the results. Another lesson learned.)

    Eventually, the store's IT department rolled out their own application on the division's single 3270 terminal. My wife still prepared her model at home (since time in the 3270 seat was hard to come by), and transcribed the printed results into the terminal at work. The IT application required her to enter not only the table values but the calculated sums at the end of each column and row. If a sum did not match the contents of its row or column, the IT app reported an error, but did not provide the correct value, nor even state which of the thirty-odd values was incorrect!

  • by salesgeek ( 263995 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @08:29AM (#8724379) Homepage
    Spreadsheets are critical tools for "knowledge workers" because they allow them to explore ideas, analyze information and identify trends. The problem is that most "knowledge workers" are competant at some aspect of doing business and not at developing appropriate software tools. It is a problem when a spreadsheet is used as a multiuser shared data application. Spreadsheets allow:

    * Entrepeneuers to financially model their business plan.
    * Calculations to be performed more accurately than say, in the margin of a ledger pad.
    * Simple busines processes to be tracked and managed using a computer instead of say, a legal pad.
    * Executives to summarize and categorize and drill down to analyze information from a database (pivot tables)

    At the end of the day, I've found that spreadsheets are not the cause of business mistakes. When there is a spreadsheet failure, there are ususally a couple of fundamental problems:

    * Lack of attention to detail
    * No oversight or validation
    * Numbers are not reliable to begin with
    * No one bothered to actually do a what-if using a reasonable range of scenarios - they only looked at the rose colored one.
  • by Bill, Shooter of Bul ( 629286 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @09:06AM (#8724652) Journal
    I think its funny that here at slashdot the center of advocasy for open software, that 95% of the discussion here is using Excel to mean spreadsheet. Talk about subtle bias! Apparently OO isn't good enough, or it isn't popular enough even amoungst slashdotters. Perhaps, its a mistake to give such generic names to the components of OO. Now if it was something like firecalc or pheonixview then I think it would be discussed more. Instead, Now when you talk about an individual component you have to use the suite's name( IE OpenOffice Calc). No one says Micorsoft Office System Excel 2004. They just call it excell, a techno sounding name that doesn't provide any clue as to its use.
  • by HarveyBirdman ( 627248 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @09:19AM (#8724779) Journal
    But it is quite true in this case. They haven't done anything with Excel beyond adding pointless features. Other spreadsheets have been tried, some with neat innovations, but they don't make it because, well, in most cases users like me don't get to choose which software we use at work.

    How about the simple idea of breaking away from the rectangular grid? Or free form cells placed on a diagram or schematic or blueprint?

  • by Freedom Bug ( 86180 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @09:45AM (#8725002) Homepage
    What I don't understand is: they make us software developers use change control (for good reason), but upper management builds their business on this fragile house of cards spreadsheet system.

    Is there a good change control system for spreadsheets? Sure, we could treat the xls files as opaque binary files, but that's losing most of the power of the change control system. I'm sure it's out there. Pointers anyone?

    Bryan
  • by tjic ( 530860 ) on Wednesday March 31, 2004 @10:17AM (#8725292) Homepage

    An acquaintance criticized spreadsheets and praised pencil and paper forms because mathematical errors can crop up in either one, but with paper there is a double-entry system, running totals, and review by brains and eyeballs.

    My argument is that paper is a big step backwards:

    1. it's not FTP-able; can not make arbitrary backups
    2. it's not mailable
    3. one can insert arbitrary figures with out validation
      • line 1 (paying customers): 10

      • line 2 (non-paying customers): 10
        line 3 (all customers; add 1+2): 400
    ...and yet, I understand my acquaintance's points. However, I think he has identified a defective coding style (yes, I'm arguing that filling in a spreadsheet is equivalent to writing a program), and that defective spreadsheet coding styles is encouraged by the fact that spreadsheets are a "language" that don't give the right mix of features.

    I use a decently large spreadsheet to run Technical Video Rental [technicalvideorental.com], and I've certainly found bugs in it, but I've noted that the bugs are denser, and harder to find in those areas where the computation appears with more intermediate values hidden.

    I think that a more confident spreadsheet programmer tends to hide more variables in complex cell formula; as I am not a confident spreadsheet programmer, I've - in many places - spread formula across multiple cells...and this has helped me figure out bugs.

    This points out running totals as one example of good practice. Nothing could be simpler in a spreadsheet, yet we almost never see it.

    So: why do spreadsheet programmers not do these things?

    One reason that occurs to me is that spreadsheets conflate calculation with presentation. Intermediate values use up screen real estate, and look ugly.

    Yes, there are tools that *allow* one to separate calculation from presentation: one could have two separate tabs, for example.

    Yet these tools allow for disambiguation of calculation and presentation in the same way that assembly programming allows for object oriented design.

    Or, to rephrase it: "Hidden steps considered harmful".

    I don't even like C/C++ code that puts too much computation on a single line: I want intermediate values that I can step through with a debugger.

    Perhaps what's needed are much higher level tools with in the spreadsheet that let one select cells of interest on one tab, then create a presentation tab based on these? I've got visions of cool Mac-Aqua-like greying out of 90% of cells, while one drags and drops the still-crisp cells around... Another/alternate idea: it might be nice if instead of the heavyweight tabs that most spreadsheets support, one could open zoom in on a single presentation cell and investigate little "pocket tabs" which might have ~10 x ~10 cells in them. The equivalent in C/C++ would be a complex expression on one line that decomposed itself into multiple lines with intermediate values only when you walk it with a debugger.

    Now, don't get me wrong: I'm not arguing for fancy presentation layers, or dancing pie-charts; I'm arguing for the ability to take a huge page of calculations and tie the some of the inputs, intermediate steps, and output to a much smaller summary page, or, conversely, I'm arguing for the ability to take spreadsheets as they are currently written, and expand them into a debuggable format.

    This, I argue, would make spreadsheets more useful, and decrease the number of bugs that crop up in them.

  • I catch flack each and every time I say that, but I still think it's true.

    The ss has some serious advantages. In an environment of increasing number density and decreasing personal involvement, the need to have a comprehesive tool for data analysis could only have given birth to the spreadsheet. We could talk all day about how handy the ss is for many of the tasks in this environment.

    But the space between the substance is what concerns me. Ss have allowed us to max/min too many things without much regard for the things that are undefined and necessarily intangible, but are still entangled in the matter itself. No corporate ss takes into account the costs of pollution, unemployment and general social degradation due to uncontrolled greed.

    Like handguns, ss have brought us significant personal power at the cost of a good many social problems. Hence, they seem to require more careful handling and regulation. One aspect to this is training, and in general ethics training is a good place to start. (The BBB in my area is attempting to emphasize this, but they are meeting stiff resistance from the business community.)

    Ss should be used with care, and their results are suspect anyway. That's the least message I've tried to convey for years.

Single tasking: Just Say No.

Working...