Spreadsheet screwups cost companies big money
Harvard economists Reinhart and Rogoff are hardly alone. Users everywhere make mistakes every day that have major consequences.
An astounding 88% of all spreadsheets have errors in them, and 50% of those used by large companies have "material defects," according to a CNBC.com report that cited research from U.K.-based financial modeling company F1F9.
F1F9 managing director Kenny Whitelaw-Jones blamed most of these errors on a lack of industrywide standards for financial modeling, the website said. Another problem, Whitelaw-Jones noted, is that many spreadsheets are "ridiculously complex and impossible to read."
Experts, though, have been sounding the alarm bells about spreadsheets for years. In 2007, CIO noted that "many public companies and government organizations are trying to wean themselves off their reliance on spreadsheets for complex and critical financial transactions." The problem, of course, is that's easier said than done.
Spreadsheets are as big a part of modern corporate life as the coffee machine in the break room. To call them "ubiquitous" doesn't do justice to do the endless rows of neatly arranged numbers that are the bane of existence for many employees. No one is quite sure how many spreadsheets are in existence, but it's a huge number for sure.
Microsoft (MSFT), which owns and publishes moneyNOW, an MSN Money site, estimates that about 1 billion people use Excel, the most popular spreadsheet program. Google's free spreadsheet program has plenty of users as well. So, the numbers of error-filed documents have to be massive, given that some spreadsheets have thousands of calculations in them.
One of the more noteworthy recent spreadsheet blunders was uncovered by JPMorgan (JPM) during its recent investigation into the so-called London Whale scandal, for the trader whose outsized bet landed the venerable Wall Street firm in hot water. Fortune noted that the financial model the traders were using was operated through a series of Excel spreadsheets that added a key measure that should have been averaged instead.
"The result: Risk officers at JPMorgan believed the credit derivatives bets were half as risky as they actually were," the magazine says.
The outcome at MF Global was even worse. Fortune noted that a year before the commodities broker collapsed, "Consultants hired by the firm determined it needed to improve" its Excel spreadsheets. Those improvements were never made.
Former CEO Jon Corzine is now facing civil charges from the Commodities Future Trading Commission of keeping the company going during its final days by illegally using customer funds.
Jonathan Berr does not own shares of the listed stocks. Follow him on Twitter @jdberr.
More on moneyNOW
Dollars to donuts Corzine just gets the perfunctory slap on the wrist as the unknowing customers take the hit.
The new American mantra is "Privatize the profits and socialize the losses".
And We The People reap the losses.
one problem with spread-sheets and other computerized documents is that those educated in the last 30 years or so never learned how to do math without the aid of computers. when I graduated from high school, I knew from memory the product of squared numbers through 25 and most of the numbers ending with zeros and fives to well over one-hundred.
my first full time employer (1970) could divide numbers in hundreds of thousands by up to four digits and write down the first three digits of the dividend before starting the long divisions on paper. this was before computers and calculators with simple division features. he seldom had to change the third number in his dividend (the original number was typically close enough for government work!)
usually adding or subtracting one number from the third digit and never the first two.
I did 'spreadsheets' with calculators and my brains for about 15 years before we could afford computers that could do the spreadsheets electronically. errors appeared quickly when the ups and downs didn't balance with rights to lefts. it was a problem to find the cause of the errors most times, but we didn't stop until we had the right answers.
the young future competitors I trained had no idea whether their products had the correct answers or not when the work was submitted to me for review. all they knew was they had so much info and you punched it into the computer and it spit out the results. the final answer(s) typically showed me that a problem or problems existed when I started my reviews. I then relied on my old skills to find where the young folks went astray.
don't get me wrong. I use spreadsheets every day here on the point. but I know that I have to check the rational of the final answers mentally before I put the spreadsheets in stone.
There is an old acronym that you seldom see anymore. GIGO, for those who don't know, stands for garbage in - garbage out. We have come to believe in the saying that "figures don't lie" but we seldom remember the rest of that saying that continues "but liars figure." The thing about statistics data is that it can be made to say anything that you want it to say. There is no substitute for using your own head and gut when making decisions about anything financial or otherwise. Information is ok as long as you know and trust the source but even then mistakes can be fatal.
The famous body count numbers used in the Vietnam conflict to indicate that we were winning gave a lot of decision and policy makers a false sense of our progress that lasted up until we got our butts kicked out of that nation by the North Vietnamese army. The video of our last ditch evacuation by helicopter from the roof of the U.S. Embassy was an eye opener for a lot of people and was a lesson that we still haven't learned because we still get stuck in the political tar babies all over the world based upon flawed information that often comes from (guess what) bad spreadsheets along with erroneous or phony intelligence information (oxymoron?)
that's why you always test your formulae. Every good engineer and scientist knows this. You test it on a known set of conditions and you always do back of the envelope estimations to see if the program jives. A program is only as smart as the person who wrote it.
There's is an assumption throughout this article and much thinking throughout society, I think. I've not seen so much evidence that corporate management suffers the great consternation these losses might suggest to many of us. I rarely see genuine internal auditing or serious modernization of technologies and methods to explore and reduce (permanently !) these "errors." On the contrary, I have found many public and private entities very relaxed when pursuing corrections/improvements, at their best, and very agile at "creative accounting" that can send almost anything under the radar, at their worst.
A bigger problem may be how many of these organizations stupidly use and share simple EXEL sheets that can even be pulled up via a Google search.
I know EXACTLY what you're talking about. I graduated over 40 years ago, and believe me, if you couldn't at least add and subtract in your head, you didn't graduate. As an example, about 20 years ago I was working as a part-time cashier in a supermarket, and the computer went down. EVERYBODY under 30 that was in the front cashiering was totally helpless on how give change back. The cash registers could be worked mechanically, so that wasn't a problem. We had to take ALL of those under 30 and SHOW them how to count out the change back to the customer. I was shocked on the decline of basic education in this country. And from what I can see, it's still going on.
They should've taught us that Microsoft Excel would be the most important thing in college :P
ah.. ha.. and we were wondering how the US got so far into debt.... maybe dems and the potus aren't idiots, maybe congress really does something besides give themselves raises; and duck out of forced healthcare. maybe the repubs aren't riding the short bus, maybe the IRS didn't spent 8M on line dancing and making movies. maybe.. its Excel..
And this is new because.... Spreadsheets are only as good as the person who created it and all the people who review and approve it.
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
[BRIEFING.COM] The major averages began the new trading week on a slightly lower note with small caps leading the weakness. The Russell 2000 shed 0.3% while the S&P 500 slipped less than a point with six sectors ending in the red.
Equity indices began the day in negative territory with only the Nasdaq (-0.04%) making a very brief appearance in the green. After sliding through the first hour of action, the major averages reversed and spent the remainder of the session climbing off ... More
More Market News
Like many companies this winter, the fast-food giant blamed a drop in same-store sales on the weather. But could its problems be bigger than a snowbank?
MUST-SEE ON MSN
- Video: Easy DIY smoked meats at home
A charcuterie master shares his process for cold-smoking meat at home.
- Jetpacks about to go mainstream
- Weird things covered by home insurance
- Bing: 70 percent of adults report 'digital eye strain'