You can spend thousands of euros on business software and find everyone back in Excel a few months later. It is not always because people do not want to change.
Often the software takes more steps than the previous method, does not handle real exceptions, or was designed without observing the people who will use it. The parallel spreadsheet becomes the quickest way to get the work done.
The file is feedback
If users keep an Excel file alongside the business system, that file is a clue. It may contain a missing view, a rule the system does not represent, or a step that is too slow in the software.
Before banning it, I would ask the person using it to show me a task from beginning to end. Where do they open the spreadsheet? Which data do they copy? What decision can they make there that is harder in the business system?
Reduce friction instead of adding features at random
The answers help distinguish a training issue from a product limitation. Sometimes an existing feature just needs to be easier to find; other times the workflow needs fixing, a bulk operation is needed, or a frequent exception needs handling.
Not every spreadsheet needs to go. Excel can remain useful for exploratory analysis and simulations. The problem starts when it becomes a second, essential but unshared source for operational information the business system should manage.
Business software works when it simplifies the process. The signal to look for is not how many features it has, but whether people can complete their work without inventing an alternative route.
How to distinguish work that needs structure from work that can stay in Excel
Adapted from one of my LinkedIn posts and added to the blog on 10 September 2026. The date shown refers to publication on this website.